2004 (4) TMI 437

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... , SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : P.G. Chacko, Member (J) (Oral)]. The adjudicating authority has confirmed a demand of duty of over Rs. 30 lakhs against the applicants by denying them the benefit of Notification Nos. 30/97-Cus., dated 1-4-1997 and 51/2000-Cus., dated 27-4-2000. It has also imposed a penalty of Rs. 1 lakh on the party under Section 112 of the Customs Act, 1962. Tod .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the conditions of the aforesaid notifications were satisfactorily fulfilled by the party. Having regard to this undisputed position, we are of the view that the applicants have a strong prima facie case for the purpose of waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery. Accordingly, we dispense with the requirement of pre-deposit and stay recovery of the duty and penalty amounts till final disposal of .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X