9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (9) TMI 992X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Sharma, AR ORDER Per: R K Singh: The Miscellaneous Application has been filed by the appellant seeking extension of stay granted by the Tribunal earlier. The appellant has stated that in spite of the earlier Stay Order, Revenue is insisting for recovery and hence seeking extension of the said Stay Order. 2. Ld. Departmental Representative on the other hand stated that with effect from 06.08.20 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Apex Court in ITO v. M.K. Mohammed Kunhi reported in 71 ITR 815 (S.C.), in which the Supreme Court, in the context of power of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, held that the power to grant stay of recovery proceedings pending an appeal is incidental and ancillary. It was held that an express grant of statutory power carries with it, by necessary implication, the authority to use all reasonable ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... power to grant stay." From the foregoing it is evident that the power to grant stay although not expressly provided in the Statute (either before 06.08.2014 or with effect therefrom) it was and continues to be an inherent power of the Tribunal. As regards the contention of the Id. Departmental Representative that with the abolition of Section 35C(2A) ibid the power of CESTAT to extend stay stand ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rant stay; it only sought to put fetters on the power of the Tribunal to grant stay beyond a certain period. Consequently its abolition can only have an effect that fetters which the said sub-section sought to place on the Tribunal with regard to the duration beyond which CESTAT could not grant stay no longer exist. In other words, with the abolition of Section 35C(2A) ibid with effect from 06.08. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
