Prima facie case in telecom import valuation justified only partial pre-deposit relief, not complete waiver.

Where competing tribunal views exist on the valuation of imported telecom equipment and software loaded with the goods, the assessee may establish a substantial prima facie case for interim protection, but that does not automatically justify full dispensation of pre-deposit. The Madras HC material indicated that the adverse view could be distinguished on facts, warranting consideration at final hearing; however, the record did not support complete waiver at the interim stage. Partial relief was therefore confined to a 50% pre-deposit, with stay of the balance, and the substantive issues were left for final determination by the Tribunal on merits.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the assessees were entitled to complete waiver of pre-deposit in the appeals pending before the Tribunal.

Analysis: The dispute involved the valuation of imported telecom equipment and the treatment of software loaded in or imported along with the equipment. The Tribunal had relied on one line of authority, while another co-ordinate bench decision took a divergent view. The assessees had placed materials to distinguish the adverse view on facts and had raised a substantial prima facie case warranting consideration at the stage of final hearing. At the same time, the materials did not justify total waiver of the demand at the interim stage.

Conclusion: Complete waiver of pre-deposit was declined, but the assessees were held entitled to partial relief by payment of 50% of the duty demand, with stay of the balance on such deposit.

Final Conclusion: The appeals succeeded only to the extent of reducing the pre-deposit requirement, and the matters were left to be decided finally by the Tribunal on merits.

Ratio Decidendi: Where competing tribunal views exist and the assessee establishes a prima facie case, interim relief may be confined to partial waiver rather than complete dispensation of pre-deposit.

---