Stay order protection remains intact where compliance is shown and no adverse material supports vacation or priority hearing.

A Revenue request to vacate a stay order and obtain out-of-turn hearing was rejected because it was made casually and unsupported by adverse material showing the appellants' financial inability to meet the stay conditions. The record showed compliance with the stay order through deposit and bank guarantee, and the Bench also considered the appellants' substantial annual excise duty payments. On that basis, there was no justification to disturb the stay arrangement or accord priority hearing.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Revenue's application for vacation of the stay order and for out of turn hearing of the appeals was maintainable and deserved to be allowed.

Analysis: The application was found to have been filed in a casual manner, with no adverse material showing the appellants' financial inability to comply with the stay conditions. The record showed compliance with the stay order by deposit and bank guarantee, and the Bench also noted the substantial annual excise duty payment made by the appellants. On these facts, no justification was found for disturbing the stay or granting priority hearing.

Conclusion: The request for vacation of the stay and for out of turn hearing was rejected.

---