1996 (2) TMI 159

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... l. The respondent No. 3 - Assistant Commissioner passed order of adjudication holding that the appellants are liable to pay Central Excise duty on Physician samples at the assessable value of identical goods sold through depots. The appellant challenged the order by filing appeal before respondent No. 2 - Commissioner of Central Excise. The appellant also filed application for stay of enforceme .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e learned Counsel for the respondents and in our judgment, it is not permissible for the Assistant Commissioner to commence the recovery proceedings even while the stay application filed by the appellant is pending before respondent No. 2 and is not disposed of. The appellate authority cannot decline to consider the stay application and thereby permitting respondent No. 3 to proceed with the enfor .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X