Pre-deposit waiver and financial hardship: partial interim relief granted where prima facie merits were weak in an indirect tax dispute.

In a stay application under indirect tax law, full waiver of pre-deposit was refused where the appellant failed to establish a strong prima facie case on classification and excisability, and the exemption notification did not assist on the facts. The Tribunal nevertheless considered the pleaded financial hardship and the potential impact on revival of the unit, and granted only partial interim relief by directing a reduced deposit and staying recovery of the balance on compliance.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellant was entitled to waiver of pre-deposit in the stay application and, if not, what amount of deposit should be directed having regard to the prima facie merits and financial hardship.

Analysis: The appellant's contention that the earlier classification dispute had concluded and that the goods were not excisable was not accepted at the prima facie stage. The earlier appellate orders were read as not accepting the Department's proposed classification under Chapter 23, but not as determining that no duty was payable at all. The exemption notification relied upon was also found not to assist the appellant on the facts presented. At the same time, the Tribunal took note of the pleaded financial condition and the possible impact on the revival of the unit.

Conclusion: Full waiver of pre-deposit was refused, but partial relief was granted by directing deposit of Rs. 5 lakhs and staying recovery of the balance amount on compliance.

Final Conclusion: The stay application was disposed of by granting only limited interim protection, balancing the absence of a strong prima facie case with the appellant's financial hardship.

Ratio Decidendi: In a stay application under indirect tax law, pre-deposit may be reduced rather than fully waived where the appellant fails to establish a strong prima facie case, but financial hardship justifies partial interim relief.

---