Pre-deposit conditions may be modified for financial hardship where a prima facie case exists, preserving appellate remedy.

A substantial pre-deposit condition for hearing an appeal may be modified where it causes undue hardship to a sick industrial company and a prima facie case is shown. The court balanced the petitioner's strained financial position against the revenue's interest and found that effective appellate remedy should not be denied. It therefore reduced the cash deposit requirement and added a bank guarantee, with compliance to restore the appeal before the Tribunal.

---

---

Issues: Whether the pre-deposit condition imposed for hearing the appeal before the Tribunal required modification in view of the petitioner's financial hardship and prima facie case.

Analysis: The Tribunal had directed deposit of a substantial part of the disputed duty as a condition for hearing the appeal. The petitioner showed that it was treated as a sick industrial company and that its financial position was strained. The Court also noted that a prima facie case existed in the petitioner's favour and that denial of effective appellate remedy would cause hardship. Balancing the magnitude of the demand against the petitioner's financial predicament, the Court found it just to modify the condition.

Conclusion: The pre-deposit requirement was modified to a reduced cash deposit with bank guarantee, and compliance would restore the appeal to the Tribunal's file.

Final Conclusion: The writ petition succeeded in part by granting partial relief against the original pre-deposit condition while preserving the appeal subject to compliance.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a substantial pre-deposit condition would cause undue hardship to a sick industrial company and a prima facie case is shown, the writ court may suitably modify the condition to secure the revenue while preserving appellate remedy.

---