9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (10) TMI 896 - AT - Central ExciseExtension of stay order - Held that - Tribunal in the case of M/s Haldiram India Pvt.Ltd. & others Vs Commissioner, Central Excise & Service Tax - 2014 (10) TMI 724 - CESTAT NEW DELHI (LB) , held that the Stay Order passed by the Tribunal may be extended after considering the necessary facts as it would authorize the exercise of discretion by the Tribunal for grant of such extension. - Appeal was not taken for hearing by the Tribunal as there is huge pendency of the appeals. It is noted that lot of appeals have already been listed and therefore it is difficult to take up the appeal hearing at this stage. - Stay extended.
Issues: Extension of stay order, disposal of appeal, necessary steps for disposal of appeal, pendency of appeals
In this judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT AHMEDABAD, the applicant filed a miscellaneous application for the extension of the period of stay, referencing Stay Order No. S/1958/WZB/AHD/2012 dated 06/09/2012. The Tribunal referred to a previous case involving M/s Haldiram India Pvt.Ltd. & others, where it was held that the Tribunal could extend a Stay Order after considering necessary facts and exercising discretion. The Tribunal emphasized that an extension of stay could be granted beyond the initial period of 365 days if the appellant was ready and willing for the appeal's disposal and had not engaged in delaying tactics. The Tribunal directed the maintenance of a register to prioritize appeals with stay orders for listing, subject to organizational limitations. The Tribunal ordered that all present applications and appeals should be listed for disposal on merits before the appropriate Bench. Regarding the appearance in the case, none represented the applicant. The Authorized Representative for the Revenue stated that the appellant had not taken necessary steps for the appeal's disposal. After considering the submissions and records, the Tribunal noted the significant pendency of appeals, making it challenging to schedule the appeal for a hearing at the current stage. Consequently, the Tribunal granted an extension of stay until the appeal's disposal, given the circumstances of the case. The miscellaneous application filed by the applicant was disposed of accordingly.
|
