Tribunal allows Stay Petition, sets aside order, and deems appellant's evidence sufficient for appeal.

The Tribunal allowed the Stay Petition and set aside the impugned order, permitting the appeal to proceed for disposal. The appellant's evidence, including a Chartered Accountant's certificate and State Bank confirmation, was deemed sufficient to prove the end use of the imported goods for manufacturing leather goods for export. The Tribunal found that the notification in question did not necessitate an end use certificate from the Central Excise authority, and contemporaneous evidence was considered valid in establishing the consumption of imported goods in manufacturing processes.

---

---

Issues:
1. Waiver of pre-deposit of duty
2. Requirement of end use certificate for imported goods
3. Interpretation of Notification No.224/85-Cus, dt.9.7.85
4. Consideration of contemporaneous evidence in proving end use

Analysis:
1. The Stay Petition was filed for the waiver of pre-deposit of duty amounting to Rs.10,94,765, which was confirmed by the adjudicating authority and upheld by the first appellate authority due to the absence of an end use certificate from the concerned Central Excise authority. The Tribunal decided to allow the Stay Petition and proceed with the appeal for disposal, as the issue was deemed narrow.

2. The appellant imported Midsole Insole material for the leather industry under a concessional rate of duty, executing an end use bond. Despite providing evidence such as a Chartered Accountant's certificate and State Bank confirmation of foreign exchange receipts from exports, the lower authorities insisted on an end use certificate from the Central Excise authority. The appellant argued that the notification did not require such a certificate and presented sufficient evidence of end use.

3. The Tribunal examined Notification No.224/85-Cus, dt.9.7.85, which did not mandate the production of an end use certificate or the execution of a bond by the importer. The appellant's evidence, including the affidavit and Chartered Accountant's certificate, along with State Bank confirmation, supported the claim that the imported goods were used in manufacturing leather goods for export.

4. The Tribunal referenced previous judgments, noting that contemporaneous evidence like a Chartered Accountant's certificate could be considered to establish the consumption of imported goods in manufacturing. As the evidence provided by the appellant was deemed sufficient to prove end use, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed.

This detailed analysis of the judgment highlights the issues of pre-deposit waiver, end use certificate requirements, interpretation of relevant notifications, and the significance of contemporaneous evidence in legal proceedings.

---