Collector's Stay Application Dismissed for Lack of Proper Affidavit under CEGAT Rules

The Tribunal dismissed the stay application filed by the Collector of Central Excise, Indore, against an order by the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), New Delhi, due to the absence of a proper affidavit supporting the application as required by Rule 28 of the CEGAT (Procedure) Rules. The statement submitted by the Assistant Collector was deemed a verified statement rather than a valid affidavit under the Code of Civil Procedure, leading to non-compliance with legal requirements. Consequently, the stay application was dismissed for its defective nature and failure to adhere to affidavit submission rules.

---

---

Issues: Stay application without a proper affidavit

In this case, the Collector of Central Excise, Indore, filed an appeal against an order passed by the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), New Delhi. The appeal was accompanied by a stay application which lacked the necessary supporting affidavit as required by Rule 28 of the CEGAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982. The matter was adjourned multiple times due to the absence of a proper affidavit supporting the stay application. The appellant finally submitted an unattested statement purported to be an affidavit by the Assistant Collector (Legal). The respondent argued that this statement did not meet the legal requirements of an affidavit and requested the dismissal of the stay application on this basis.

The Tribunal examined the relevant provisions of the CEGAT (Procedure) Rules and the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. Rule 28(4) of the CEGAT (Procedure) Rules mandates that the contents of the application for stay must be supported by an affidavit sworn to by the appellant or their authorized agent. The statement submitted by the Assistant Collector, though labeled as an affidavit, did not meet the legal standards of an affidavit as per the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. The Code specifies that an affidavit must be sworn before an oath commissioner or a Notary Public. The Tribunal also referred to Order 6 Rule 15, Order 11 Rules 9 and 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure to emphasize the requirements for verification and form of affidavits in legal proceedings.

Based on the analysis of the legal provisions and the nature of the statement submitted by the Assistant Collector, the Tribunal concluded that the document presented as an affidavit was, in fact, a verified statement and did not fulfill the criteria of a proper affidavit. Therefore, the Tribunal dismissed the stay application due to its defective nature and non-compliance with the rules governing the submission of affidavits in legal proceedings.

---