Stay jurisdiction under section 35F requires an appeal; without one, the Tribunal cannot entertain the application.

The Tribunal's power to grant stay under section 35F is available only where an appeal has been instituted against the relevant decision or order. An application directed against an interim stay order of the Collector (Appeals), without any appeal against that order, was therefore misconceived and based on an incorrect understanding of law. In the absence of an appeal, the Tribunal could not entertain the stay request, and the application was rejected as not maintainable.

---

---

Issues: Whether an application seeking stay before the Tribunal was maintainable without any appeal being filed against the interim stay order of the Collector (Appeals), and whether the Tribunal could exercise power under section 35F in the absence of such appeal.

Analysis: The application was directed against an interim stay order passed by the Collector (Appeals), but no appeal had been filed against that order. On the language of section 35F, the Tribunal's power to consider stay arises in an appeal instituted before it against the decision or order appealed against. In the absence of an appeal against the stay order, the application was misconceived and filed on an incorrect understanding of law.

Conclusion: The stay application was not maintainable and was rejected.

---