Coercive excise recovery stayed while pending stay applications were undecided, with attached goods protected from auction.

Where appeals and stay applications against excise demand and penalty orders were already pending before the appellate tribunal, coercive recovery was treated as unjustified until those stay applications were decided. The attached goods could remain under attachment, but the authorities were not permitted to proceed with auction while the stay requests remained pending. Recovery proceedings were therefore kept in abeyance pending disposal of the stay applications, with interim protection against sale of the attached goods.

---

---

Issues: Whether recovery action by the Central Excise authorities and proposed auction of attached goods could proceed while the stay applications against the demand orders were still pending before the appellate tribunal.

Analysis: The petitioner had already filed appeals and stay applications against the demand and penalty orders, and the stay applications were fixed for hearing. In that situation, coercive recovery was considered unjustified. The goods could remain under attachment, but auction was not warranted until disposal of the stay applications.

Conclusion: Recovery proceedings were directed to remain in abeyance until the stay applications were decided, and the attached goods could not be auctioned in the meantime. The writ petition was dismissed with this interim protection.

---