Stay applications under Central Excise law are independent of goods detention; modification allowed for compliance period.

Detention of the factory or goods was held to have no bearing on a stay application under section 35F of the Central Excise Act, because the stay request was independent of any recovery proceedings in which detention may have been ordered. The request for modification was not accepted on the basis of any exceptional circumstance arising from the earlier omission to raise the fact, but relief was granted in the interest of justice for compliance purposes. The stay order was therefore modified so that it would not be enforced during the one-month period allowed for compliance.

---

---

Issues: Whether the detention of the factory or goods had any bearing on the stay application under section 35F of the Central Excise Act, and whether the stay order required modification.

Analysis: The detention of the factory or goods was held to have no bearing on the stay application, since the application concerned only the grant of stay under section 35F and was independent of any recovery proceedings in which detention might have been ordered. The request for modification was not accepted on the ground of any exceptional circumstance arising from the omission to raise the fact earlier, but relief was considered in the interest of justice for compliance purposes.

Outcome: The stay order was modified to the extent that it would not be enforced during the period allowed for compliance, namely one month.

---