Prima facie case and balance of convenience justified waiver of pre-deposit, with only partial deposit required from the proprietor.

In stay matters, waiver of pre-deposit may be granted where a prima facie case is shown and the balance of convenience does not justify insisting on full deposit, even if a limited deposit is imposed. Here, the tribunal accepted prima facie objection that penalty should not be imposed both on a proprietary concern and its proprietor, but found the material insufficient for complete waiver, so the concern obtained waiver while the proprietor was directed to deposit part of the penalty. For the third applicant, the penalty rested only on ownership of a godown, and his prima facie explanation of leasing and subletting justified waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether pre-deposit of the penalties imposed on the proprietary concern and its proprietor should be waived. (ii) Whether pre-deposit of the penalty imposed on the third applicant should be waived.

Issue (i): Whether pre-deposit of the penalties imposed on the proprietary concern and its proprietor should be waived.

Analysis: The contention that penalty cannot be imposed both on a proprietary concern and on its proprietor was accepted as a prima facie point. At the same time, the order recorded a prima facie involvement of these applicants in the alleged smuggling, and the stay material was found insufficient to justify complete waiver of deposit.

Conclusion: Pre-deposit was waived for the proprietary concern, while the proprietor was directed to deposit Rs. 1 lakh and recovery of the balance penalty was stayed.

Issue (ii): Whether pre-deposit of the penalty imposed on the third applicant should be waived.

Analysis: The penalty against the third applicant was based only on ownership of the godown, without a specific finding of involvement in smuggling. His explanation that the premises had been leased and sublet was accepted prima facie.

Conclusion: Pre-deposit was waived and recovery of the penalty was stayed.

Final Conclusion: The stay applications were substantially allowed by granting waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery in respect of all applicants, with a partial deposit condition imposed only on the proprietor.

Ratio Decidendi: In stay matters, pre-deposit may be waived where the appellant establishes a prima facie case and the balance of convenience does not warrant insistence on full deposit, even if limited conditional deposit is imposed.

---