Tribunal orders deposit of Rs.7,00,000 within 8 weeks, waivers upon compliance. Prima facie case not established.

The tribunal directed Applicant No.1 to deposit Rs.7,00,000 within 8 weeks. Upon compliance, the remaining duty, interest, and penalty for Applicant No.1, as well as the penalty for Applicant No.2, would be waived, with recovery stayed during the appeals' pendency. The applicants failed to establish a prima facie case for waiving the entire predeposit amount due to the absence of their name in the shipping bills. Compliance was to be reported by 20.11.2013, with liberty given to mention the date of compliance for the appeals' hearing.

---

---

Issues:
- Application for waiver of predeposit of duty and penalty
- Non-mention of applicant's name in shipping bills
- Compliance with Commissioner (Appeals) direction
- Prima facie case for waiver of predeposit

Analysis:
The judgment pertains to an application for waiver of predeposit of duty and penalty. Applicant No.1 filed the application seeking waiver of duty of Rs.29,99,322/- along with interest and penalty, while Applicant No.2, a partner of Applicant No.1, sought waiver of predeposit of penalty amounting to Rs.1,00,000/-. The dispute arose from the importation of knitting and embroidery machines under 4 EPCG licenses, where the machines were used by a third party for knitting embroidery goods. The demand was raised due to the absence of the applicant's name as the manufacturer in the shipping bills, leading to the denial of DEPB benefit. The applicant contended that quadruplicate copies of shipping bills did mention their name, but only 12 shipping bills provided for inspection did not include their name.

The Revenue argued that the Commissioner (Appeals) had directed the applicants to make a pre-deposit of the entire duty amount for the appeal hearing, which was not complied with, resulting in the rejection of the appeal for non-compliance with the stay order. The Revenue further contended that corroborative statements from the third party indicated the absence of the applicant's name in the shipping bills, undermining the applicant's argument that the non-supply of shipping bills affected the duty demand. The tribunal observed that the 12 shipping bills supplied did not mention the applicant's name, leading to the conclusion that the applicants failed to establish a prima facie case for the waiver of the entire predeposit amount of duty, interest, and penalty.

Consequently, the tribunal directed Applicant No.1 to deposit a sum of Rs.7,00,000/- within 8 weeks. Upon compliance with this directive, the predeposit of the remaining duty amount, interest, and penalty for Applicant No.1, as well as the penalty for Applicant No.2, would be waived, with recovery stayed during the pendency of the respective appeals. The parties were given the liberty to mention on the date of compliance for the hearing of the appeals, with compliance to be reported on 20.11.2013. The judgment was dictated and pronounced in open court by the tribunal.

---