Tribunal modifies stay order, waives predeposit requirement, grants stay against recovery.

The Tribunal in Mumbai allowed the modification of a stay order for an appellant based on a subsequent decision in a different case, where the obligation to pay a percentage of the value was not applicable. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of a prima facie inquiry for modification based on new circumstances. Considering the appellant's case and compliance with the Tribunal's decision, the requirement of predeposit was waived, and a stay against recovery of dues was granted during the appeal's pendency.

---

---

Issues:
1. Modification of stay order based on subsequent decision of the Tribunal.
2. Permissibility of review of Tribunal's order by itself.
3. Consideration of a favorable decision in appellant's case for modification of stay order.

Analysis:
1. The appellant was directed to deposit a specific amount and report compliance by a certain date. The appellant sought modification of the stay order based on a subsequent decision of the Tribunal in a different case. The Tribunal in Mumbai held that reversal of input service credit with interest subsequently would suffice, and the obligation to pay a percentage of the value would not apply. The appellant argued that this decision was not available at the time of the original order and requested modification of the stay order.

2. The learned A.R. contended that allowing such modification would amount to reviewing the Tribunal's order by the Tribunal itself, which is generally not permitted. Reference was made to a decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay for support. However, the Tribunal noted that the High Court did not entirely rule out the modification of stay orders by the Tribunal. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of a prima facie inquiry to determine if modification is warranted based on new circumstances or reasons not available when the original order was made.

3. The Tribunal considered the appellant's case for waiver and modification of the stay order in light of the subsequent decision of the Tribunal in Mumbai. It was highlighted that if a favorable decision exists at the time of considering a stay application, it should be taken into account. The appellant had reversed the credit with interest and sought confirmation from the Commissioner regarding the amount. The Tribunal concluded that the appellant had fulfilled the requirements as per the decision of the Tribunal in Mumbai, establishing a prima facie case for waiver and modification of the stay order. Consequently, the requirement of predeposit was waived, and the stay against recovery of dues was granted during the appeal's pendency.

---