Jurisdictional defect in excise proceedings justified interim stay, with duty secured by bond and penalty recovery kept in abeyance.

Prima facie want of jurisdiction in the earlier proceedings was treated as sufficient to justify interim protection against recovery of duty and penalty pending appeal. The analysis notes that if the original show cause notice could not support the adjudication, a fresh notice alleging suppression would be required to invoke the extended period. On that basis, interim stay was granted subject to a personal bond securing the duty amount, and recovery of the penalty amount was waived during the pendency of the appeal.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellants were entitled to interim relief against recovery of duty and penalty on the basis of a prima facie jurisdictional defect in the proceedings.

Analysis: The order notes that the earlier proceedings were prima facie vitiated for want of jurisdiction and that, if the original show cause notice could not sustain the adjudication, a fresh notice alleging suppression would be required for invoking the extended period. On that basis, the appellate forum considered it appropriate to protect the appellants pending the appeal while securing the duty amount by personal bond.

Conclusion: Interim stay was granted on furnishing a personal bond covering the duty amount, and recovery of the penalty amount was waived pending the appeal.

---