TMI Blog2014 (8) TMI 908X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... application vide Misc. No. C/14/10 dt. 18.01.10 but extended the period to deposit. The said order was challenged by the appellant before the Hon'ble Delhi High Court who set aside the same and the matter was remanded to the Tribunal for fresh consideration of the stay petition. Subsequently vide Misc. Order No. C/191/10 dt. 12.10.10, the Tribunal allowed the stay petition un-conditionally, thus not requiring the appellant to deposit any part of duty or penalty etc., imposed upon them. Tribunal has referred to only the merits of the case as also to the clarification given by the DGCA. The Tribunal observed that in the facts and circumstances of the case we find it difficult at the Interim stay to insist for compliance of requirement of p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e the Bench on 14.03.14 Revenue sought adjournment and the matter was adjourned on 25.04.14. Again on the said date the matter could not be taken up as the special counsel of the Revenue was not available. Accordingly the same was adjourn to 27.06.14. On the said date again the matter could not be heard as no time was left with the Bench. Sh. R.K. Mulchandani appearing for the respondent brought to our notice the fact of repeated re-fixing of the hearing and his coming to Delhi on all the above dates. He also submitted that appellant had already given a bank guarantee for ₹ 6.5 Crores, which is increasing his loses to the extent of approximately 20 Lakh per year. Accordingly he made a specific request on the last date of hearing that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e ld. Joint CDR, Ms. Ranjana Jha appears and submits that the Revenue, inspite of all efforts made, is unable to get in touch with Sh. A.K. Raha and reiterates the request for adjournment. 1.5 The said request of adjournment is very strongly opposed by ld. Advocate appearing for the appellant. He submits that though there were granted unconditional stay in terms of the remand order of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court, they had executed a bank guarantee during the course of investigation to the extent of approximately 6.5 Crores which is lying with the Revenue and they are incurring expenses in respect of the same. He further submits that the disputed issue stands covered by the clarification given by the DGCA, as also by one of the Tribu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... un-conditionally, thus not requiring the appellant to deposit any part of duty or penalty etc., imposed upon them. 4. We have gone through the said Misc. Order dt. 12.10.10 passed by the Tribunal allowing the stay petition unconditionally. We, however, note that the Advocate appearing for the appellant had mentioned before the Bench that the departments interest is fully protected by the full bank guarantee furnished by the appellant. The learned Advocate submits that though the above factual statement was made before the Tribunal the said fact of bank guarantee was not the basis for the Tribunal for allowing the stay petition. The uncondition stay was granted by taking into account the prima facie merits as also the clarification given ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
