https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=125909 A stay application before CESTAT examined whether the appellant had shown a prima facie case for complete waiver of pre-deposit of duty and penalty, and whether financial hardship justified dispensing with further deposit. The Tribunal found that the limitation plea was not accepted at the stay stage because the demand arose after receipt of the later laboratory report. It also held that financial hardship was supported only by an affidavit and no further evidence. On those facts, the appellant was not entitled to full waiver, and was directed to make a partial pre-deposit, after which the balance duty and penalty stood waived and recovery remained stayed pending appeal. en-us Wed, 08 Apr 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 31 Oct 2012 14:58:16 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=125909 A stay application before CESTAT examined whether the appellant had shown a prima facie case for complete waiver of pre-deposit of duty and penalty, and whether financial hardship justified dispensing with further deposit. The Tribunal found that the limitation plea was not accepted at the stay stage because the demand arose after receipt of the later laboratory report. It also held that financial hardship was supported only by an affidavit and no further evidence. On those facts, the appellant was not entitled to full waiver, and was directed to make a partial pre-deposit, after which the balance duty and penalty stood waived and recovery remained stayed pending appeal. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 08 Apr 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=125909