Kiran J. Desai vs Commissioner Of Central Excise, ...

(Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No. PII/MMD/214/2012 dated 27/09/2012 passed by Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals),Pune-II)

Kiran J. Desai Appellant Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Kolhapur Respondent

Appearance:

None for Appellant Shri S.R. Nair, E.O. (AR), for Respondent

CORAM: Honble Mr. M.V. Ravindran, Member (Judicial) Honble Mr. C.J. Mathew, Member (Technical)

Date of Hearing : 31/08/2015 Date of Decision : 31/08/2015

ORDER NO

Per: M.V. Ravindran

The appellant seek extension of stay on the ground that their appeal has not come up for disposal for no fault of theirs. In this regard we find that in the case of M/s. Venketeshwara Filaments Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. Vs. C.C.E. & S.T., Vapi-2014-TIOL-2388-CESTAT-AHM, the Tribunal observed as under:-

The omissions of 1st, 2nd and 3rd proviso to section 35C(2A) of the CEA, 1944 now has to be read to the effect that there is no provision for making any further applications for extension of stay nor Tribunal has powers for hearing and disposing the applications for extension of stay from 7.8.2014. In the absence of any provisions for hearing and disposing applications for extension of stay, we find that the applications made by the appellants herein have to be disposed of as such The Tribunal further observed as under:

At the same time it would also mean that after initial granting of stay by the Tribunal, order does not get lapsed. Omission of 1st, 2nd and 3rd proviso would mean that the appeal filed by an assessee needs to be disposed of within a period of 3 years is only the requirement and stay orders which has been passed by the Tribunal under the powers mandated under the powers granted by section 35C of the CEA, 1944 would remain in force. The Tribunal finally concluded that:

 Any stay order passed by the Tribunal, if it is in force beyond 07.08.2014, it would continue till the disposal of the appeals and there is no need for filling any further applications for extension of orders granting stay either fully or partially.

3. In the light of the aforesaid judgment of CESTAT and as the stay in the present case was in force beyond 07.08.2014, the same would continue till the disposal of the appeal.

4. In view of this, the application for extension of stay is disposed of.

(Dictated in Court)

(C.J. Mathew) Member (Technical) (M.V. Ravindran) Member (Judicial)

akp 1 3 APPEAL No.ST/85053/13-Mum