Pre-deposit waiver under excise law requires prompt, specific diligence on missing documents, not a bare natural justice claim.

Waiver of pre-deposit under Section 35F depends on more than a general allegation of denial of natural justice. The Tribunal noted that reliance on non-supply of documents must be supported by prompt, specific, and diligent pursuit of the missing material; here, the request was belated and the assessee did not clearly identify the deficiency or seek timely follow-up. It also treated the departmental record as sufficient support for the demand, noted evidence relating to a non-existing transport company, and held that cross-examination was unnecessary because no statement was relied upon. Partial pre-deposit and stay pending appeal were granted.

---

---

Issues: Whether waiver of pre-deposit under Section 35F of the Central Excise Act, 1944 was justified on the ground of alleged non-supply of relied-upon documents, denial of natural justice, and undue hardship.

Analysis: The requirement of furnishing relied-upon documents before requiring an assessee to answer the charge is a settled facet of natural justice. On the record, however, the request for documents was made belatedly, the assessee did not promptly identify the alleged missing documents even after receiving a substantial set of papers, and there was no timely written follow-up seeking more time or clarifying the deficiency. The Tribunal distinguished the relied-on precedent on facts and found that the assessee had not shown due diligence. It also noted that the Commissioner's findings on wrongful availment of Cenvat credit were based on the records, that documents relating to a non-existing transport company had emerged, and that a substantial part of the demand had already been paid. Cross-examination was found unnecessary because no statement had been relied upon.

Conclusion: The plea for complete waiver of pre-deposit was rejected. The assessee was required to deposit the balance duty demand and a part of the penalty amount, while the remaining pre-deposit requirement was waived and recovery stayed till disposal of the appeals.

Final Conclusion: The stay applications were disposed of by granting only partial relief, with conditional pre-deposit of the remaining duty and a reduced amount of penalty.

Ratio Decidendi: Waiver of pre-deposit under Section 35F cannot be granted merely on a general allegation of denial of natural justice where the assessee has not shown prompt, specific, and diligent pursuit of the relied-upon documents and the department's case is otherwise supported by the record.

---