2014 (7) TMI 201

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ion No.60682 of 2013 seeking extension of the stay earlier granted. Following the decision of the Kerala High Court in Ashoka Rubber Products vs. C.C.E. - 1989 (43) ELT 60S (Ker.), Tribunal clarified, by its order dated 12.11.2013 that since waiver of pre deposit was granted on 21.12.2011 this operates as stay of proceedings for recovery as well and Revenue shall not therefore initiate steps for recovery. Stay was granted to operate during pendency of the appeal. 2. The present application seeks further extension of the stay extended by order dated 12.11.2013. The trigger for this application is the letter dated 19.3.2014 issued by the Superintendent of Central Excise, Range II, Bhiwadi informing the appellant that stay order granted by ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ion. The first proviso thereto enjoins that where an order of stay is made in any proceeding relating to an appeal, the Appellate Tribunal shall dispose of the appeal within a period of 180 days from the date of such order. The second proviso enjoins that where such appeal is not disposed of within the period specified in the first proviso, the stay order shall, on expiry of that period, stand vacated. A further proviso (third proviso) introduced by Finance Act, 2013 with effect from 10.5.2013, states that where an appeal is not disposed within the period specified in the first proviso, the Appellate Tribunal may on an application made in this behalf by a party and on being satisfied that the delay in disposing of the appeal is not attri....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....f the appeals and workload assigned to the Principal Bench as well as various Benches of CESTAT, we are of the view that entire object and purpose of insertion of sub-section 2A in Section 35C by Section 140 of the Finance Act, 2002 with effect from 11.5.2002 and third proviso by Finance Act, 2013 will stand defeated, if the waiver of pre deposit is granted indefinitely. The judgment in Kumar Cotton Mills Pvt. Ltd. cannot be interpreted to give powers to the Tribunal to extend the order of waiver of pre deposit indefinitely". 8. From these observations of the Hon'ble High Court, it appears that the parties did not sensitize the High Court to the relevant provisions of the 1944 Act. A provisions of Section 35C(2A) enact a sunset perio....