Pre-deposit and stay orders must be reasoned and fair; premature rejection without hearing was set aside and remanded.

An order rejecting an appeal for non-compliance with pre-deposit requirements was unsustainable where it was passed before the compliance period expired and without considering a pending modification request. The interim stay order was also defective because it denied dispensation on prima facie case and undue hardship without recorded reasons. An order affecting the right of appeal and recovery of duty and penalty must be reasoned and made after a fair hearing. The appeal rejection and stay order were set aside, and the matter was remanded for fresh disposal of the stay application after personal hearing and further proceedings in accordance with law.

---

---

Issues: Whether the order rejecting the appeal for non-compliance with pre-deposit requirements, and the interim stay order refusing dispensation without recorded reasons, were sustainable and whether the matter required remand for fresh consideration.

Analysis: The lower appellate authority disposed of the appeal before the time granted for compliance had expired and without considering the pending modification request. The interim stay order also recorded a finding against the appellant on prima facie case and undue hardship without giving reasons. An order affecting the right of appeal and recovery of duty and penalty must be supported by reasons and passed after affording a fair opportunity of hearing. The absence of a speaking order and premature disposal of the appeal amounted to violation of natural justice.

Conclusion: The order rejecting the appeal and the interim stay order were set aside, and the matter was remanded for fresh disposal of the stay application after personal hearing and for proceedings in accordance with law.

---