https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51338 An amendment inserting Section 35C(2A) of the Central Excise Act was treated as prospective because it contained no express or necessary intendment of retrospectivity, so stay orders passed before 11-5-2002 were not invalidated and continued until disposal of the appeal. The provision was construed as imposing a time-frame to reduce delay, not as removing the Tribunal's power to protect an appellant in pending matters. Stay orders made after the amendment, including those linked to waiver of pre-deposit, were therefore not automatically extinguished after 180 days, and the Tribunal retained authority to extend or renew stay on appropriate facts. en-us Mon, 28 Oct 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 24 Sep 2010 11:46:28 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51338 An amendment inserting Section 35C(2A) of the Central Excise Act was treated as prospective because it contained no express or necessary intendment of retrospectivity, so stay orders passed before 11-5-2002 were not invalidated and continued until disposal of the appeal. The provision was construed as imposing a time-frame to reduce delay, not as removing the Tribunal's power to protect an appellant in pending matters. Stay orders made after the amendment, including those linked to waiver of pre-deposit, were therefore not automatically extinguished after 180 days, and the Tribunal retained authority to extend or renew stay on appropriate facts. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 28 Oct 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51338