TMI Blog2017 (9) TMI 1750X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ite the department’s persuasion, the Tribunal did not take up the appeal for disposal and kept on extending the stay from time to time. Therefore, more than addressing the question of law it is necessary to address the grievance of the appellant/ revenue. The only manner in which the grievance of the appellant could be addressed is to issue appropriate directions. - I.T.T.A.Nos. 331, 336, 346, 389, 134, 707 and 386 of 2017 - - - Dated:- 18-9-2017 - V. Ramasubramanian And Mrs. T. Rajani JJ. For the Appellant : Ms. K. Mamatha Chowdary, Senior Standing Counsel For the Respondent : A. V. A. Siva Karthikeya COMMON ORDER: (V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN, J) The Revenue has come up with the above appeals, challenging the order ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... xmann.com 251 (SC) , closed the Special Leave Petition leaving the question of law on the interpretation of the third proviso to Section 254 (2A) open to be decided in appropriate cases. 5. The third proviso to Section 254 (2A) reads as follows: ..Provided also that if such appeal is not so disposed of within the period allowed under the first proviso or the period or periods extended or allowed under the second proviso, which shall not, in any case, exceed three hundred and sixty-five days, the order of stay shall stand vacated after the expiry of such period or periods, even if the delay in disposing of the appeal is not attributable to the assessee. 6. Sub-section (2A) of Section 254 was inserted by the Finance Act, 1999 w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... follows: Provided also that if such appeal is not so disposed of within the period allowed under the first proviso or the period or periods extended or allowed under the second proviso, the order of stay shall stand vacated after the expiry of such period or periods. 9. Subsequently, the third proviso, was again modified and the modified third proviso is what we have extracted earlier and the interpretation of the said proviso, is the first substantial question of law involved in this case. 10. After having imposed an obligation under sub-section (2A) of Section 254 upon the Appellate Tribunal to decide an appeal within a period of four years, we do not know how the Parliament thought it fit to penalize the Assessee with the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... son would adversely affect another person or not. The simple test is to see whether the delay is on the part of a person who stands to benefit by the stay. If an Assessee is responsible for prolonging the matter, after having obtained a stay, he is certainly not entitled to continue to have the benefit of stay. But if for reasons not attributable to the Assessee, the disposal of the appeal takes a longer time than what is prescribed, it may not be proper to impose the penal consequence upon the Assessee. No law, which imposes a penal consequence upon one for the fault of another, can be said to be mandatory. A penal consequence for non-adherence to a statutory prescription should fall only upon the person, who was the responsible for such f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
