Pre-deposit waiver under central excise law depends on undue hardship, prima facie case, and proven financial hardship.

Section 35F of the Central Excise Act permits an appeal against duty or penalty only on deposit of the amount demanded, subject to waiver where deposit would cause undue hardship and conditions are needed to protect Revenue. Undue hardship requires assessment of both a prima facie case and financial hardship. Here, no financial hardship was pleaded or proved before the Tribunal or the Court, while the Tribunal considered the appellants' arguable points and still ordered only a limited pre-deposit. The Court held that the conditions imposed were not onerous and that the Tribunal had properly exercised its statutory discretion, so the direction for partial pre-deposit was upheld and complete waiver was refused.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Tribunal erred in directing partial pre-deposit under Section 35F of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and in declining complete waiver of pre-deposit.

Analysis: Section 35F permits an appeal against duty or penalty only on deposit of the amount demanded, subject to waiver by the Appellate Authority or Tribunal where deposit would cause undue hardship and appropriate conditions are imposed to safeguard the interests of Revenue. The concept of undue hardship requires consideration of both a prima facie case and financial hardship. In the present matters, no financial hardship was pleaded or proved before the Tribunal or before the Court. The Tribunal considered the appellants' submissions, noticed arguable points in their favour, and still chose only a limited pre-deposit. The Court found that the conditions imposed were not onerous and that the Tribunal had exercised its statutory discretion properly.

Conclusion: The direction for partial pre-deposit was upheld and complete waiver was ed; the challenge to the Tribunal's order failed.

---