Section 35f - Stay Applications - The court discussed the proviso to Section 35f, which allows the appellate authority to grant stay if the demand levied would cause undue hardship to the person appealing. The collector is required to pass a speaking order taking into account this aspect and consider whether any part of the demand is prima facie barred by time before passing appropriate orders.

Fact of the Case:

The writ petition was filed against the order of the Collector, Central Excise (Appeals) regarding pending appeals against the orders of the Assistant Collector, Central Excise, Varanasi, in which stay applications were filed.

Finding of the Court:

The court dismissed the writ petition, emphasizing that the collector should pass a speaking order considering the undue hardship aspect and whether any part of the demand is prima facie barred by time before passing appropriate orders.

Issues: The issues involved the rejection of stay applications by the Collector, Central Excise (Appeals) and the consideration of undue hardship and prima facie time-barred demands.

Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the proviso to Section 35f, emphasizing the need for the collector to consider undue hardship and prima facie time-barred demands when deciding on stay applications.

Final Decision: The writ petition was dismissed.