Wrong-party duty demand and input credit adjustment justified waiver of pre-deposit and stay in carton-user dispute.

Demand against the carton user was treated as wrongly raised because any short levy, if any, would arise at the manufacturer or supplier level. The demand was based on denial of small scale exemption and the resulting effect on higher notional credit, but the department did not invoke the provision for corresponding reduction of input credit and proceeded only under the recovery provision. On those facts, interim protection was considered justified, and pre-deposit of duty and penalty was waived with stay of the order.

---

---

Issues: Whether pre-deposit of duty and penalty should be waived and the order stayed in a case where the demand was made against the user of cartons, with the demand founded on denial of small scale exemption and consequential impact on higher notional credit.

Analysis: The demand was directed against the user of the cartons, although any short levy, if at all, would arise at the level of the manufacturers or suppliers. The department had not invoked the provision relating to corresponding reduction of credit on downward variation of duty paid on inputs, and the demand stood confirmed only under the recovery provision. On these facts, the tribunal found the demand to have been raised against the wrong party and considered the interim protection fully justified.

Conclusion: Pre-deposit of duty and penalty was waived and operation of the order was stayed.

---