2015 (2) TMI 393 - AT - Service Tax

Tribunal Grants Extension of Stay in Appeal, Cites Backlog as Reason

The Tribunal granted an extension of stay in the appeal until its disposal, citing the significant backlog of appeals as the reason for the delay in ... Extension of stay order - Held that:- Following Larger Bench of the Tribunal in the case of M/s Haldiram India Pvt. Limited & others Vs Commissioner, Central Excise & Service Tax - [2014 (10) TMI 724 - CESTAT NEW DELHI (LB)], held that the Stay Order passed by the Tribunal may be extended after considering the necessary facts as it would authorize the exercise of discretion by the Tribunal for grant of such extension - Stay extended. Issues:Extension of period of stay in appeal due to delay in disposalAnalysis:The judgment dealt with a miscellaneous application for the extension of the period of stay in an appeal. The applicant had filed the application seeking an extension of the stay order dated 07.08.2013. The Tribunal referred to a previous decision by the Larger Bench in the case of M/s Haldiram India Pvt. Limited & others vs Commissioner, Central Excise & Service Tax, where it was held that the Tribunal could grant an extension of stay beyond the initial period of 365 days if the appeal could not be disposed of due to reasons not attributable to the appellant/assessee. The Tribunal emphasized the need for a speaking order disclosing the satisfaction of the Tribunal regarding the absence of any delay or protractive stratagems by the appellant/assessee in the non-disposal of the appeal.The applicant's advocate argued that the appeal had not been taken up for hearing after the stay order was passed, asserting that there was no negligence or inaction on the part of the applicant. Conversely, the Revenue's representative contended that the appellant had not taken the necessary steps for the disposal of the appeal. The Tribunal, after hearing both sides and examining the records, acknowledged that the appeal had not been scheduled for a hearing due to a significant backlog of appeals. Given the substantial number of appeals already listed, the Tribunal found it challenging to accommodate the appeal hearing at that point.Consequently, the Tribunal granted an extension of stay until the disposal of the appeal, considering the circumstances of the case. The miscellaneous application filed by the applicant was disposed of accordingly. The judgment highlighted the importance of considering the reasons for delay in appeal disposal and the need for a balanced approach in granting extensions of stay beyond the prescribed period, especially in cases where the delay is not caused by the appellant/assessee.