TMI Blog2014 (11) TMI 452X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ch 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 (2014 (7) TMI 738 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT) it would be open for the Department to move a rectification application before the Tribunal - As the Tribunal is expected to consider the individual case and pass a speaking order as to whether the delay can be attributed to the respondentassessee or not, in whose favour the stay is granted in the event the assessee contributed to such delay, the extension of stay is not to be made automatic. - Appeal disposed of. - Tax Appeal No.882 of 2014 - - - Dated:- 8-10-2014 - MS. HARSHA DEVANI AND MS SONIA GOKANI, JJ. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nal (CESTAT), West Zonal Bench, Ahmedabad, while passing Misc. Order M/1070310768/2014 dated 12.02.2014 passed in Application No.E/ MA(Extn)/10606/2014 in Appeal No.E/844/2006, is right in extending the stay when the delay in proceedings of the appeal before the tribunal is deliberately on the part of the assessee ? (d) Whether the Hon'ble Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), West Zonal Bench, Ahmedabad, while passing Misc. Order M/1070310768/2014 dated 12.02.2014 passed in Application No.E/ MA(Extn)/10606/2014 in Appeal No.E/844/2006, is right to the extent to grant extension of stay in an appeal pending for more than 7 years after dismissing the appeal on the ground of nonprosecution vide order dated 16. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nding Counsel Mrs.V.D. Nanavati for the Revenue and Shri Paresh Dave, learned counsel appearing for the respondentAssessee. 3. In the present case, the respondentassessee, who is engaged in the manufacturing of edible oil and Vanaspati falling under Chapter/Schedule 1503 and 1504 respectively of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985, was issued a show cause notice on February 08, 2005, for recovery of duty amounting to ₹ 58,73,265/along with interest and penalty. The case was adjudicated upon by the Commissioner vide OrderinOriginal dated December 19, 2005, whereby he confirmed the demand raised by way of show cause notice and imposed equal amount of penalty. Aggrieved by the same, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Tribunal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2014 and allied appeals, where this Court has held as under: 5.07. The result of the aforesaid discussion would be that by section 35C(2A) of the Central Excise Act it cannot be inferred a legislative intent to curtain / withdraw power of the Appellate Tribunal to extend stay beyond the total period of 365 days. However, the aforesaid extension of stay beyond the period of total 365 days from the date of grant of initial stay would always be subject to the subjective satisfaction by the learned Appellate Tribunal and on an application made by the assessee / appellant to extend stay and on being satisfied that the delay in disposing of the appeal within a period of 365 days from the date of grant of initial stay is not attribut ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and the Appellate Tribunal shall grant priority to such appeals over appeals in which no stay is granted. For that even the Appellate Tribunal and/or registrar of the Appellate Tribunal is required to maintain separate register of the appeals in which stay has been granted fully and/or partially and the appeals in which no stay has been granted. 5.8. Now, so far as second question which is posed for consideration of this Court is whether while disposing of the application for extension of stay granted earlier, the learned Appellate Tribunal is required to pass a speaking / reasoned order or not? As observed hereinabove, the learned Appellate Tribunal can extend the stay granted earlier beyond the period of 365 days from the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hat in a particular case the assessee has not cooperated and/or has tried to take undue advantage of stay and despite the same the learned Appellate Tribunal has extended stay order, revenue can challenge the same before the higher forum / High Court. 5.09. All these appeals, on considering the impugned orders passed by the learned Appellate Tribunal extending stay, it appears that the impugned orders are nonspeaking and nonreasoned orders and therefore, as such matters are required to be remanded to the learned Appellate Tribunal to consider the respective applications for extension of stay afresh and pass a detailed speaking order in each of the matters in light of the observations made hereinabove. 7. As the Tribunal is expect ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
