Undue hardship and exemption notification claim justified dispensing with pre-deposit and staying duty recovery.

Undue hardship justified dispensing with pre-deposit where the applicants claimed exemption notification benefit and the facts were said to mirror an earlier case in which unconditional stay had been granted. The Tribunal treated the similarity with the prior matter as material and held that insisting on payment of the duty demand would cause undue hardship. Pre-deposit of the duty amount was therefore dispensed with, and recovery of the duty was stayed.

---

---

Issues: Whether pre-deposit of the duty demand should be dispensed with on the ground of undue hardship in view of the claimed benefit of the exemption notification.

Analysis: The Tribunal noted that the earlier order in a similar matter had granted unconditional stay, and the facts of the present case were stated to be similar. On that basis, it found that insisting on deposit of the duty amount would cause undue hardship to the applicants.

Conclusion: Pre-deposit of the duty amount was dispensed with and recovery of the duty was stayed.

---