2015 (1) TMI 71

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... application before the Tribunal. - Decided against Revenue. - TAX APPEAL NO. 1381 of 2014 - - - Dated:- 23-12-2014 - MR. AKIL KURESHI AND MR. VIPUL M. PANCHOLI, JJ. FOR THE APPELLANT : MS AMEE YAJNIK, ADVOCATE JUDGEMENT Per: Akil Kureshi: 1. Draft amendment is allowed. Revenue has filed this appeal raising following question for our consideration: Whether the Hon'ble Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), West Zonal Bench, Ahmedabad, while passing Misc. Order No.M /1275512785/2014 dated 28.05.2014, was right in extending stay beyond period of 365 days, in violation of statutory provisions contained in Section 129B(2A) of Customs Act, 1962? 2. Short issue pertains to the pow .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ), it should not be construed that any latitude is given to the Appellate Tribunal to extend the period of stay except on good cause and if the Appellate Tribunal is satisfied that the matter could not be heard and disposed of by reason of the fault of the Appellate Tribunal for the reasons not attributable to the assessee. It also may not be construed that the Appellate Tribunal can extend stay indefinitely. On expiry of every 180 days the concerned assessee / appellant is required to submit an appropriate application before the learned Appellate Tribunal to extend the stay granted earlier and the Appellate Tribunal may extend the stay for a further period but not beyond 180 days at a stretch and on arriving at the subjective satisfaction, .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... assigning any reasons. The Tribunal would extend the stay only for proper reasons to be recorded. In the present case, no such reasons have been recorded. In this context, the counsel relied on the following observations of this Court in case of Commissioner vs. Small Industries Development Bank of India (supra). 7. So far as the Question No.2 is concerned, i.e. Whether the learned Appellate Tribunal is required to pass a speaking order while extending stay or not, for the reasons stated above, the said question is answered in favour of the revenue department and against the assessee. Consequently, all the matters are remanded to the learned Appellate Tribunal to pass appropriate order afresh and pass speaking and reasoned .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X