2014 (10) TMI 513

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ed further on 28.02.2013, has lapsed. Further extension of the stay is therefore sought. The appeal could not be disposed of on account of pendency of several older appeals for hearing. Hence stay granted on 12.10.2011 is extended to operate, during pendency of the appeals. These applications are disposed of accordingly." The Revenue in the present appeal has formulated the following questions of law:- "1. Whether the Hon'ble CESTAT erred in granting waiver of pre-deposit of assessed demand in favour of the respondents during pendency of the appeal thereby extending the period of stay beyond 365 days ignoring the recent amendment to section 35-C of the Central Excise Act, 1944, made through enactment of Finance Bill, 2013. 2. W....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....h referred to the decision of the Supreme Court in Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise, Ahmedabad Vs. Kumar Cotton Mills Pvt. Ltd.4 While considering the provisions of the second proviso to Section 35C (2A) of the Act, the Supreme Court held as follows:- "6. The sub-section which was introduced in terrorem cannot be construed as punishing the assessees for matters which may be completely beyond their control. For example, many of the Tribunals are not constituted and it is not possible for such Tribunals to dispose of matters. Occasionally by reason of other administrative exigencies for which the assessee cannot be held liable, the stay applications are not disposed within the time specified. The reasoning of the Tribunal express....