Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether waiver of pre-deposit and unconditional stay could be granted in the pending excise appeal.
Analysis: The Tribunal found that the appellant had not established a sufficient prima facie case for total waiver. In respect of three inputs, the record showed strong material that the invoices were issued for the second consignment without any fresh supply and that the credit had already been taken on the earlier consignment, indicating that the disputed inputs formed part of the stock on which Modvat credit had been availed. The appellant also did not demonstrate financial hardship. Applying the settled principles of prima facie case, balance of convenience, and undue hardship, the Tribunal held that conditional protection alone was justified.
Conclusion: Unconditional stay was declined and the appellant was directed to make a pre-deposit of Rs. 18 lakhs; upon compliance, recovery of the remaining duty, interest, and penalties was stayed during the pendency of the appeal.
Final Conclusion: The interim relief was granted only in a limited form, with the appeal left pending subject to compliance with the ordered pre-deposit.
Ratio Decidendi: In stay matters, waiver of pre-deposit depends on the appellant establishing a prima facie case and undue hardship, failing which conditional deposit may be ordered to protect the revenue.