Appellate refund orders remain enforceable unless stayed, so subordinate authorities must comply pending further proceedings.

An appellate refund direction remains operative and binding unless its operation is expressly stayed by a competent forum. Filing a further appeal does not by itself suspend implementation of the appellate order, so the subordinate excise authority was required to act in accordance with that direction and decide the matter within the time fixed by the Court, subject to any future stay. The writ succeeded to the extent of compelling compliance with the appellate order, because no stay had been obtained from the Tribunal.

---

---

Issues: Whether a writ of mandamus could be issued directing the excise authority to comply with the appellate authority's refund directions in the absence of any stay of that order.

Analysis: The appellate order directing grant of refund remained operative because no stay had been obtained from the Tribunal. An order passed by a competent appellate authority does not cease to operate merely because a further appeal has been filed; its implementation continues until it is stayed. In these circumstances, the subordinate authority was required to act in accordance with the appellate direction and decide the matter within the time fixed by the Court, subject to any future stay that might be granted.

Conclusion: The direction to comply with the appellate order was upheld and the writ petition succeeded to that extent, with the authority required to proceed unless stayed by the Tribunal.

Ratio Decidendi: An appellate order remains binding and enforceable unless its operation is expressly stayed by a competent forum.

---