Prima facie case for pre-deposit waiver failed, but penalty relief was granted subject to compliance with tax deposit directions.

A request for complete waiver of pre-deposit was declined because the appellant did not establish a strong prima facie case: the circular relied on was not produced and no specimen mobile phone bills were on record. The absence of pleaded financial hardship also weighed against full waiver. Conditional relief was nevertheless granted for the penalty, subject to compliance with the pre-deposit direction for the service tax demand. On that basis, pre-deposit of the tax demand was required, while recovery and pre-deposit of the penalty were waived and stayed upon compliance.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellant had made out a prima facie case for complete waiver of pre-deposit in respect of the service tax demand and the penalty.

Analysis: The record indicated that the lower authorities had relied on verification of the mobile phone bills and on the Board circular cited by the appellant. In the absence of the circular itself and any specimen copies of the bills on record, the appellant did not establish a strong prima facie case. No financial hardship was pleaded. The order therefore declined complete waiver, but granted conditional relief in respect of the penalty upon compliance with the pre-deposit direction for the tax demand.

Conclusion: Complete waiver of pre-deposit was refused. The appellant was directed to pre-deposit the service tax demand, while pre-deposit of the penalty and recovery thereof stood waived and stayed on compliance.

---