https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=222010 The Tribunal clarified that the Department cannot enforce recovery solely based on stay order expiration if appeal delay is not due to appellant. It discussed Section 35C (2A) flexibility in disposal time frames, emphasizing administrative challenges. Legislative intent allows Tribunal to grant stays beyond six months without extension applications unless circumstances change. Requiring extensions for pre-amendment stay orders is deemed counterproductive due to appeal backlog. The Tribunal recommended specifying stay order durations post-amendment for clarity and directed the Department not to take coercive recovery action, treating stay duration as linked to appeal disposal. en-us Fri, 15 Feb 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 07 Feb 2014 12:41:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=222010 The Tribunal clarified that the Department cannot enforce recovery solely based on stay order expiration if appeal delay is not due to appellant. It discussed Section 35C (2A) flexibility in disposal time frames, emphasizing administrative challenges. Legislative intent allows Tribunal to grant stays beyond six months without extension applications unless circumstances change. Requiring extensions for pre-amendment stay orders is deemed counterproductive due to appeal backlog. The Tribunal recommended specifying stay order durations post-amendment for clarity and directed the Department not to take coercive recovery action, treating stay duration as linked to appeal disposal. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 15 Feb 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=222010