ORDER
C.N.B. Nair, Member (T)
1. The duty demand is based on the finding that the appellant has clandestinely manufactured and removed TV sets. Learned Counsel for the appellant submits that the finding flows merely from the fact that the appellant had consumed more picture tube’s than the colour TV sets produced, the data having been taken from the balancesheet. There is no evidence at all indicating clandestine production or removal. It is the appellant’s explanation that the higher consumption of picture tube is on account of breakage/loss of picture tube and not on account of any clandestine production of TV sets. The learned Counsel also points out that the waste/loss is within the normal limits.
2. There is merit in the appellants’ explanation. Pre-deposits are not warranted, they are waived and recovery of any amount stayed. Appeal to come up for hearing on 12th July, 2004.