2014 (10) TMI 514

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....appellant and granted waiver of pre-deposit and unconditional stay of realisation of the adjudicated liability, which is the subject matter of the substantive appeal. As 180 days has elapsed from the date of grant of stay, this application is filed seeking extension of the stay. The appeal could not be disposed of on account of pendency of several older appeals in this Tribunal and not on account of any delay on the part of the petitioner. 2. Hence, we grant extension of the stay granted on 06/05/2013, to operate during pendency of the appeal. This application is accordingly disposed of." The Revenue in the present appeal has formulated the following questions of law:- "1. Whether the Hon'ble CESTAT erred in granting waiver of ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ed in the first proviso, the stay order shall, on the expiry of that period, stand vacated." In a similar case, in Commissioner, Customs and Central Excise Vs. M/s J.P. Transformers3, which was decided by a Division Bench of this Court on 8 October 2013, the Division Bench 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 constitut....