https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=92801 A pre-deposit request under Rule 96ZO(2) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 turned on whether the appellant had shown a sufficient prima facie case for waiver of recovery during the appeal. The appellant relied on closure intimation, production resumption records, and a certificate explaining the absence of electricity meter readings because the meter room had been sealed. The Tribunal treated the abatement claim as arguable and requiring evidence to be assessed by the lower authority, but found that the material did not justify complete waiver at the interim stage. Partial waiver of pre-deposit was granted, with the balance left stayed subject to compliance. en-us Wed, 10 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 05 Nov 2011 12:07:50 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=92801 A pre-deposit request under Rule 96ZO(2) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 turned on whether the appellant had shown a sufficient prima facie case for waiver of recovery during the appeal. The appellant relied on closure intimation, production resumption records, and a certificate explaining the absence of electricity meter readings because the meter room had been sealed. The Tribunal treated the abatement claim as arguable and requiring evidence to be assessed by the lower authority, but found that the material did not justify complete waiver at the interim stage. Partial waiver of pre-deposit was granted, with the balance left stayed subject to compliance. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 10 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=92801