Generate professional replies to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Step 1 – Issue Identification & Review
The AI analyses your query, notice, order, or uploaded documents and identifies the key issues involved.
• Review the issues identified by the AI • Add, edit, remove, or refine issues as required
Step 2 – Draft Generation
Once you approve the issues, the AI performs issue-wise legal research and prepares a structured draft response.
• Relevant statutory provisions • Judicial precedents and Supreme Court, High Court and other citations • Issue-wise legal analysis • Practical arguments and supporting content • Professionally structured draft ready for further review.
Extension of Stay Granted in Appellant's Favor The Tribunal granted the appellant's application for an extension of stay of recovery in appeal No. S.T./687/2009. The stay of recovery was to continue ...
Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.
The Tribunal granted the appellant's application for an extension of stay of recovery in appeal No. S.T./687/2009. The stay of recovery was to continue until the final disposal of the appeal, with any departmental action for recovery deemed contempt of the Tribunal. The Tribunal emphasized that the delay in the appeal process was not due to the appellant's fault and ruled in favor of extending the stay to safeguard the appellant's position until the appeal's conclusive resolution.
Issues: Extension of stay of recovery in appeal No. S.T./687/2009.
Analysis: The appellant in appeal No. S.T./687/2009 had been granted a waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery in relation to the service tax demanded. This stay was to remain in force until the final disposal of the appeal. After 180 days from the initial order, the appellant applied for an extension of stay, as they received a demand notice from the Asst. Commissioner directing immediate payment. The appellant sought an extension of stay in light of this notice. The Tribunal referenced the judgment in CC & CE, Ahmedabad v. Kumar Cotton Mills Pvt. Ltd. to emphasize that the stay should be extended only with good cause and if the Tribunal is satisfied that the delay was not due to the fault of the assessee. The Tribunal clarified that the stay granted would continue until the final disposal of the appeal, and any departmental action for recovery would be considered contempt of the Tribunal.
The Tribunal highlighted that the stay granted was intended to be effective until the final disposal of the appeal and that the delay in the appeal process was not due to the appellant's conduct. Therefore, the Tribunal ruled that the order for stay of recovery of dues would persist until the appeal's final disposal, warning that any departmental action for recovery would be viewed as contempt of the Tribunal. The Tribunal allowed the application filed by the appellant, emphasizing the importance of ensuring that the stay of recovery remains in place until the appeal is conclusively resolved.
Full Summary is available for active users!
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
AI Drafter ✕
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
