Appellate order remains binding absent stay; seized gold to be released for re-export if no interim protection is obtained.

An appellate order remains operative and must be implemented unless the Revisional Authority grants a stay or interim protection. Here, the Customs Department had filed revision but had not secured any stay, so the appellate relief continued to bind the Department. The court nevertheless allowed a limited period for the Department to seek stay, and directed that release of the seized gold for re-export would follow if no stay was obtained within that time, subject to payment of the redemption fine.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Customs Department was bound to implement the appellate order and release the seized gold in the absence of any stay granted by the Revisional Authority.

Analysis: The petitioner had secured relief before the Commissioner (Appeals), who reduced the redemption fine and upheld the penalty. The Department had filed a revision petition, but no stay or interim order had been obtained from the Revisional Authority. In the absence of any stay, the appellate order remained operative and was required to be implemented. At the same time, limited time was granted to the Department to seek stay, and release was directed only if no stay or interim order was secured within that period.

Conclusion: The Department was required to implement the appellate order, and the petitioner was entitled to release of the gold for re-export upon payment of the redemption fine if no stay was obtained within the time granted.

---