Pre-deposit waiver and exemption claim failed where no prima facie case or financial hardship was shown.

Complete waiver of pre-deposit was refused because the Tribunal found no prima facie basis for the claimed exemption: the imported goods were not described as a urological X-ray examination table, and X-ray use was not treated as part of urological procedures for that purpose. The procedural objection based on alleged non-issue of a show cause notice also failed, as the demand letter had been treated as a notice and the appellant had participated before the lower authority, satisfying notice requirements in substance. In the absence of demonstrated financial hardship, the appellant was directed to deposit Rs. 1,00,000, with the balance waived and recovery stayed pending appeal.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellant was entitled to complete dispensation of pre-deposit pending appeal, and whether the demand proceedings were vitiated for alleged non-issue of a show cause notice.

Analysis: The Tribunal found, prima facie, that the imported goods were not described as a urological X-ray examination table and that X-ray could not be treated as part of urological procedures for the purpose of the claimed exemption. On the procedural objection, it noted that the appellant had treated the demand letter as a show cause notice and participated in the proceedings before the lower authority, so the requirement of notice was substantially satisfied. No financial hardship was shown.

Outcome: Full waiver of pre-deposit was declined. The appellant was directed to deposit Rs. 1,00,000 and the balance pre-deposit was dispensed with, with recovery stayed pending disposal of the appeal.

---