Automatic vacation of stay under Central Excise law applies by operation of statute when appeal is not decided in time.

The second proviso to section 35-C(2A) of the Central Excise Act operates automatically by force of law: where the Tribunal grants a stay, it must endeavour to dispose of the appeal within the stipulated period, and the stay vacates if the appeal is not decided within that time. On that construction, the Tribunal's stay order was not contrary to the statutory mandate merely because the appeal remained pending. The challenge failed, and the court held that no substantial question of law arose.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Tribunal erred in granting waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery so as to extend the period beyond the statutory limit under section 35-C(2A) of the Central Excise Act, 1944.

Analysis: The second proviso to section 35-C(2A) operates by force of law. Where a stay order is passed, the Tribunal is required to endeavour to dispose of the appeal within the stipulated period, and if the appeal is not decided within that period, the stay stands vacated automatically. On that construction, the Tribunal's stay order could not be treated as contrary to the statutory mandate merely because the appeal remained pending.

Conclusion: The challenge to the Tribunal's order failed and no substantial question of law arose. The appeal was dismissed.

---