Refund under Notification 56/02-C.E. is limited to duty actually payable, with nondisclosure supporting extended limitation and partial stay.

Refund under Notification No. 56/02-C.E. was treated as confined to duty actually payable and paid through PLA, not to any excess duty beyond the lawful liability. On the facts noted, the sales appeared to be at the factory gate, while freight and insurance were separately charged, so the appellant had not shown that those expenses formed part of the assessable value. The absence of prior disclosure of the valuation method in the returns also supported prima facie invocation of the extended limitation period. In that setting, complete waiver of pre-deposit was not justified and only conditional protection against recovery of the balance was available.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellant was entitled to complete waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery in a case concerning refund under Notification No. 56/02-C.E., and whether a prima facie case existed against the demand, interest and penalty.

Analysis: The exemption under Notification No. 56/02-C.E. was treated as available only to the extent of duty actually payable and paid through PLA, not to duty paid in excess of what was legally payable. On the facts recorded, the sales were prima facie at the factory gate, while freight and insurance were separately charged, so the appellant had not shown that such expenses formed an integral part of the assessable value. The record also indicated no prior disclosure of the method of valuation in the returns, supporting prima facie invocation of the extended limitation period. In view of these factors, complete waiver of pre-deposit was not justified.

Conclusion: The appellant was not granted full waiver of pre-deposit; partial pre-deposit was directed and recovery of the balance was stayed on compliance.

Final Conclusion: The stay application was allowed only to a limited extent, with conditional protection against recovery of the remaining demand pending disposal of the appeal.

Ratio Decidendi: Refund under Notification No. 56/02-C.E. is confined to duty actually payable and paid through PLA, and a prima facie failure to disclose the valuation basis can justify denial of full waiver and support invocation of the extended limitation period.

---