Cenvat credit pre-deposit waiver denied where appellants failed to rebut bogus supplier findings and showed no financial hardship.

Waiver of pre-deposit was refused in appeals concerning allegedly wrongly availed Cenvat credit, penalty and interest, because the appellants neither replied to the show cause notice nor appeared for personal hearing despite opportunities. The recorded statements and departmental enquiries showing the input suppliers to be bogus remained unrebutted, and the appellants produced no credible material to displace the investigation or establish financial hardship. On that basis, the Revenue's interest was held to require deposit during the pendency of the appeals, and the appellants were directed to deposit the entire demand, including the quantified credit demand and penalty, as a condition to pursue the appeals.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellants had made out a case for waiver of pre-deposit in appeals arising from a demand of wrongly availed Cenvat credit and consequential penalty and interest.

Analysis: The appellants failed to file a reply to the show cause notice, did not appear for personal hearing despite opportunities, and could not produce credible material to rebut the investigation showing that the input suppliers were bogus. The recorded statements and departmental enquiries were treated as unrebutted, and no cogent defence or financial hardship was shown to justify dispensing with the statutory pre-deposit requirement. In these circumstances, the interest of Revenue was held to require deposit of the demanded amounts during the pendency of the appeals.

Outcome: Waiver of pre-deposit was declined and deposit of the entire demand, including the quantified Cenvat credit demand and penalty, was directed as a condition for pursuing the appeals.

---