2013 (12) TMI 936 - AT - Customs

Extension of stay application - Penalty u/s 12(b) - Held that - Tribunal has directed continuation of the stay order, in case of pendency of reference application before the Hon ble High Court. As such, while taking into account the fact that the applicant has already deposited an amount of Rs. 5 lakh and reference application filed before the Hon ble High Court stands admitted, we extended the Stay Order No. S/401/2001-NB (D), dated 22-8-2001 2001 (8) TMI 766 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI and hold that the same will continue to be in force till the final disposal of the reference application by the Hon ble High Court - Stay extended.

Summary

Issues:
Grant of stay of recovery of penalty during pendency of reference application before the High Court.

Analysis:
The appellant filed a miscellaneous application seeking a stay of recovery of the penalty imposed on them while a reference application was pending before the High Court. The penalty of Rs. 10 lakh was initially imposed, and the appellant deposited Rs. 5 lakh as per the Tribunal's stay order. Subsequently, the appeal against the penalty was rejected by the Tribunal. A reference application was then filed before the High Court, questioning the correctness of levying the penalty under Section 12(b) of the Customs Act, 1962. The High Court directed the Tribunal to refer the question for its opinion. The reference application is pending before the High Court, and in the meantime, the revenue initiated recovery proceedings, demanding the appellant to deposit the remaining Rs. 5 lakh. The appellant argued that the High Court does not have jurisdiction to stay recovery proceedings during a reference application, citing relevant case laws. The appellant also referred to previous Tribunal decisions where stays were granted during similar circumstances.

The Tribunal noted that in previous decisions, stays were continued in cases of pending reference applications before the High Court. Considering that the appellant had already deposited Rs. 5 lakh and the reference application was admitted by the High Court, the Tribunal extended the previous stay order until the final disposal of the reference application by the High Court. Consequently, the miscellaneous application was allowed in favor of the appellant, and the stay order was continued until the High Court's final decision.

This detailed analysis covers the issues involved in the judgment, the procedural history, the arguments presented by the parties, relevant case laws cited, and the Tribunal's decision based on the circumstances and legal principles involved in the case.