2014 (12) TMI 733 - HC - Central Excise

Power of Tribunal to extend the stay order beyond 365 days - Whether even if it is held that the learned Appellate Tribunal can extend the stay granted earlier beyond the total period of 365 days, the learned Appellate Tribunal is required to pass a speaking order/reasoned order considering 3rd proviso to Section 35C(2A) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 - Held that - In view of the decision of this Court in case of Commissioner vs. Small Industries Development Bank of India (2014 (7) TMI 738 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT) it can be concluded that the Tribunal did not lack the power to extend stay beyond 365 days from the initial date of granting stay. However, if the stand of the revenue is that such extension was without recording reasons or without passing speaking order as required by the decision of this Court in case of Commissioner vs. Small Industries Development Bank of India (supra) it would be open for the Department to move a rectification application before the Tribunal. - Decided against Revenue.

Summary

Issues involved:
1. Whether the Appellate Tribunal is required to pass a speaking order while extending stay beyond 365 days?
2. Whether the Tribunal has the power to extend stay beyond 365 days from the initial grant without recording reasons?

Issue 1: Whether the Appellate Tribunal is required to pass a speaking order while extending stay beyond 365 days?

The High Court, citing the case of Commissioner vs. Small Industries Development Bank of India, held that the Tribunal can extend the stay even beyond 365 days if the delay in disposing of the appeal is not due to the appellant and the Tribunal is satisfied that the appellant has cooperated. The Court emphasized that the Tribunal must review the situation every 180 days and consider each case individually. It was clarified that the Tribunal should not extend the stay indefinitely and must make efforts to dispose of appeals promptly, especially those against the revenue.

Issue 2: Whether the Tribunal has the power to extend stay beyond 365 days from the initial grant without recording reasons?

The High Court noted that the Tribunal had extended the stay without recording reasons or passing a speaking order. Relying on previous judgments, the Court held that the Tribunal must provide proper reasons for extending the stay. Consequently, the matters were remanded to the Tribunal to pass appropriate orders afresh within two months, ensuring that the stay orders are continued during this period. The Tribunal was directed to dispose of the appeals promptly even during this extended period.

In conclusion, the High Court clarified that while the Tribunal has the authority to extend stay beyond 365 days, it must pass a speaking order with reasons for such extensions. Failure to do so may prompt the Department to file a rectification application. The Court emphasized the importance of timely disposal of appeals and the need for the Tribunal to prioritize cases where stay has been granted. The tax appeals were disposed of in light of these observations.