Judgment:
1. The application is for waiver of deposit of duty of Rs. 96,309/- and equal penalty. The duty has been demanded, and penalty imposed, on the ground that the applicant by underdeclaring the value of the fabrics tat it processed short paid duty on these fabrics.
2. The applicant is absent and unrepresented and requests decision after considering the submissions tat it has filed. We have read these submissions and heard the departmental representative.Sangam Processors (Bhilwara) Ltd. v. CCE 2000 (122) ELT 45 to say that the extended period of limitation which covers the entire demand in the case before us, cannot be invoked in a situation in which the processor has relied upon the data relating to the value given to him by the supplier of grey fabrics which was to be processed. We prima facie however find in this case that this was not so. Rajan Kapoor, a partner of the applicant, in his statement had admitted that the applicant had not insisted for declaration of each lot of grey fabrics and that the value of the grey fabrics was based on a declaration of grey fabrics of the same sort. Thee is in other words prima facie a clear admission that the declaration as of the value made by the applicant in pursuance of notification 27/92 was not based, as require,d on the declaration filed by the supplier of the grey fabric on what the applicant considered the value to be. This part prima facie distinguishes this case from Sangam Processors (Bhilwara) Ltd. 4. While it is contended that the factory is under closure for a year and staff members have been removed, there is no material of the claim of financial hardship. We therefore direct deposit by the applicant of Rs. 50,000/- towards duty and penalty within a month from the receipt of this order, upon which we waive deposit of the remaining duty and penalty.