Prima facie confiscation based on laboratory test results justified only partial pre-deposit, not complete waiver, in an import dispute.

Imported chocolate confectionery tested positive for melamine and was found unfit for human consumption, leading to a prima facie view that the goods breached import restrictions and food safety standards and were liable to confiscation and penalty. At the interim stage, the Tribunal accepted the laboratory report as credible and found no material to discredit it. It therefore declined complete waiver of pre-deposit, but exercised discretion to direct only a partial deposit as a condition for hearing the appeal on merits.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the imported goods were prima facie liable to absolute confiscation and penalty for alleged violation of import restrictions and food safety standards; (ii) whether the appellant was entitled to complete waiver of pre-deposit pending disposal of the appeal.

Issue (i): Whether the imported goods were prima facie liable to absolute confiscation and penalty for alleged violation of import restrictions and food safety standards.

Analysis: The test results communicated in the notice showed detection of melamine in the imported chocolate confectionery and the samples were found unfit for human consumption. The order of adjudication proceeded on the basis that the goods breached the prescribed standards and were therefore liable to confiscation. At the prima facie stage, the reliability of the governmental laboratory report was accepted, and no convincing material was shown to discredit it.

Conclusion: The goods were held prima facie liable to confiscation and the penalty was also prima facie sustainable.

Issue (ii): Whether the appellant was entitled to complete waiver of pre-deposit pending disposal of the appeal.

Analysis: The Tribunal considered the nature of the goods, the laboratory findings, and the penalty imposed, and found that a full waiver was not warranted at the interim stage. However, considering the matter as a stay application, the Tribunal exercised its discretion to require only a partial pre-deposit as a condition for hearing the appeal on merits.

Conclusion: Complete waiver of pre-deposit was refused and a partial pre-deposit was directed.

Final Conclusion: Interim relief was limited to a partial deposit, and the appeal was kept pending for hearing on merits after compliance.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the record shows a prima facie case of confiscation based on a credible laboratory report, complete waiver of pre-deposit is not automatic and the Tribunal may direct partial deposit in exercise of its discretion.

---