SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

KRISHNA KUMAR, C.SATAPATHY
Themis Pharmaceuticals – Appellant
Versus
Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
M.H. Patil, V. Sridharan, M.B. Samant, Anupam Dighe, S.P. Sheth, S.P. Mathew,A. Chopra, K.L. Bablani

ORDER

Per C. Satapathy : These 17 applications involve a common issue: whether the Tribunal can grant stay beyond a period of 180 days. The newly inserted sub-section (2A) of Section 35C of the Central Excise Act, 1944 reads as under:-

"The Appellate Tribunal shall, where it is possible to do so, hear and decide every appeal within a period of three years from the date on which such appeal is filed:

Provided that where an order of stay is made in any proceeding relating to an appeal filed under sub-section (1) of section 35B, the Appellate Tribunal shall dispose of the appeal within a period of one hundred and eighty days from the date of such order :

Provided further that if such appeal is not disposed of within the period specified in the first proviso, the stay order shall, on the expiry of that period, stand vacated."

The learned J.C.D.R. as well as the learned counsels appearing for various applicants inform us that there are as yet no decisions of the Apex Court or any of the High Courts on this issue. They also inform us that the Department, in consultation with the Ministry of Law and the learned Solicitor General of India, has taken a view that the Tribunal cannot give stay bey

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top