Bona fide subsequent purchaser protection supports waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery in customs dispute.

On a prima facie assessment, interim relief was granted where the vehicle had already been examined and assessed at import, and confiscation and redemption had occurred earlier. The later demand was also found inconsistent with the notice's limitation position under Section 28(1) of the Customs Act, 1962. As no material showed that the subsequent purchaser had any role in the import or alleged undervaluation, the tribunal accepted the principle that a bona fide later purchaser should not be burdened without proper enquiry. Unconditional waiver of pre-deposit was therefore granted and recovery of the adjudged dues was stayed pending appeal.

---

---

Issues: Whether unconditional waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery of the dues adjudged against the appellant should be granted pending appeal.

Analysis: The appellant's case was considered on a prima facie basis. The record showed that the vehicle had already been examined and assessed at the time of import, that confiscation and redemption had occurred earlier, and that the later proceedings were inconsistent with the stand taken in the notice regarding limitation under Section 28(1) of the Customs Act, 1962. There was also no material showing that the appellant, as a subsequent purchaser, had any role in the import or in the alleged undervaluation. The cited principle that a subsequent bona fide purchaser should not be saddled with liability where proper enquiry was not made supported interim protection.

Conclusion: Unconditional waiver from pre-deposit was granted and recovery of the adjudged dues against the appellant was stayed during pendency of the appeal.

---