Conditional stay and partial pre-deposit may be ordered where the dispute is debatable but no strong prima facie case is shown.

Conditional waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery may be granted where the appellant fails to show a strong prima facie case, but the dispute remains debatable and requires fuller examination at final hearing. In such circumstances, the tribunal may protect both sides by ordering partial deposit, here 25% of the duty demanded after adjustment of any amount already paid, and waiving the balance on compliance. The operative effect is interim relief on terms rather than full waiver, leaving the merits for final adjudication.

---

---

Issues: Whether waiver of the balance pre-deposit and stay of recovery could be granted pending appeal.

Analysis: The dispute raised technical questions concerning eligibility for the concessional duty benefit and the meaning of similar goods, and the record did not disclose a strong prima facie case. At the same time, the issue was debatable and required fuller examination at final hearing. In these circumstances, the balance of convenience was found to warrant partial protection, with a direction to deposit 25% of the duty demanded after adjusting any amount already paid.

Conclusion: Partial relief was granted to the appellant by directing pre-deposit of 25% of the duty demanded and by waiving the balance amount on compliance, with stay of recovery for the stipulated period.

Final Conclusion: The interim application was disposed of by granting conditional stay relief rather than full waiver, leaving the merits for final adjudication.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the appellant does not establish a strong prima facie case but the dispute is debatable, the Tribunal may grant only conditional waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery on terms that balance the interests of both sides.

---