Section 112 penalty and later duty quantification supported interim waiver of deposit and stay of recovery.

Interim protection was sought against recovery of penalty imposed under Section 112 after duty was later quantified by a corrigendum to the Commissioner's order. The Tribunal allowed the applicant to place the corrigendum on record and amend the appeal grounds, noting the departmental contention that Section 112 penalty is linked to the value of the goods. Relying on an earlier Tribunal decision cited by the applicant, and recording only a prima facie view at the interlocutory stage, it granted waiver of deposit and stayed recovery of the penalty.

---

---

Issues: Whether the applicant was entitled to waiver of deposit and stay of recovery of the penalty imposed under Section 112 when the duty was quantified later by a corrigendum to the Commissioner's order.

Analysis: The application sought leave to place the corrigendum on record and to amend the appeal grounds accordingly. The penalty was imposed under Section 112, and the dispute turned on whether the subsequent corrigendum quantifying duty could sustain the order. The Tribunal noted the departmental stand that Section 112 concerns penalty based on the value of the goods, but, at the interlocutory stage, also noted the existence of an earlier Tribunal decision relied upon by the applicant. On that basis, and while recording only a prima facie view, the Tribunal granted interim protection.

Conclusion: The application for waiver of deposit was allowed and recovery of the penalty was stayed.

---