Pre-deposit waiver and stay granted where demand appeared duplicated, partly time-barred, and only a limited Modvat balance remained in issue.

Prima facie duplication of the same invoice-based demand in separate notices, together with apparent time-bar under Rule 57-I of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, justified waiver of the balance pre-deposit and stay of recovery pending appeal. The objection that the manufacturer's depot was not registered as a dealer was also treated as prima facie untenable. Only the surviving portion relating to endorsed invoices was kept protected, and the appellant was directed to keep Rs. one lakh unutilised in the Modvat account.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellant was entitled to waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery pending the appeal.

Analysis: The demand appeared, prima facie, to include an amount demanded twice on the basis of the same invoices in different notices. A substantial portion of the demand was also prima facie time-barred, as the notice had been issued beyond the period prescribed under Rule 57-I of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 for credits taken during July and August 1994. The objection based on non-registration of the manufacturer's depot as a dealer also appeared prima facie untenable. Only the remaining portion relating to endorsed invoices required protection during the pendency of the appeal, and the appellant was directed to keep Rs. one lakh unutilised in the Modvat account.

Conclusion: Waiver of the remaining pre-deposit was granted and recovery was stayed, subject to the direction to keep Rs. one lakh unutilised in the Modvat account.

---