Pre-deposit waiver in stay applications was denied on a prima facie case and Revenue prejudice, with conditional relief granted.

In stay applications before CESTAT, the waiver of pre-deposit was refused because the plea of natural justice had to be balanced against investigation material showing a prima facie case and potential prejudice to Revenue. The Tribunal held that full waiver was not appropriate on the facts and directed each appellant to make a pre-deposit, while granting waiver of the balance demand only if the ordered deposits were made. The operative effect was conditional protection from recovery, subject to compliance with the deposit requirement.

---

---

Issues: Whether waiver of pre-deposit was warranted in the stay applications, and whether the appellants should be directed to make pre-deposit pending disposal of the appeals.

Analysis: The plea of violation of natural justice was taken into account, but the material collected during investigation also showed a prima facie case causing prejudice to the Revenue. On an overall assessment, the matter called for a balance to be struck between the appellants' grievance and the Revenue's interest. In those circumstances, full waiver was not considered appropriate and pre-deposit was directed for each appellant, with waiver of the balance demand subject to compliance.

Conclusion: Pre-deposit was ordered, and waiver of the remaining demand was granted only on compliance with the directed deposits.

---