SIGN IN SUBSCRIBE

News Update

Cus - When there is nothing on record to show that appellant had connived with other three persons to import AA batteries under the guise of declaring goods as Calcium Carbonate, penalty imposed on appellant are set aside: HCCongress fields Rahul Gandhi from Rae Bareli and Kishori Lal Sharma from AmethiCus - The penalty imposed on assessee was set aside by Tribunal against which revenue is in appeal is far below the threshold limit fixed under Notification issued by CBDT, thus on the ground of monetary policy, revenue cannot proceed with this appeal: HCGST -Since both the SCNs and orders pertain to same tax period raising identical demand by two different officers of same jurisdiction, proceedings on SCNs are clubbed and shall be re-adjudicated by one proper officer: HCFormer Jharkhand HC Chief Justice, Justice Sanjaya Kumar Mishra appointed as President of GST TribunalSale of building constructed on leasehold land - GST implicationI-T - If assessee is not charging VAT paid on purchase of goods & services to its P&L account i.e., not claiming it as expenditure, there is no requirement to treat refund of such VAT as income: ITATBengal Governor restricts entry of State FM and local police into Raj BhawanI-T - Interest received u/s 28 of Land Acquisition Act 1894 awarded by Court is capital receipt being integral part of enhanced compensation and is exempt u/s 10(37): ITATCops flatten camps of protesting students at Columbia UnivI-T - No additions are permitted on account of bogus purchases, if evidence submitted on purchase going into export and further details provided of sellers remaining uncontroverted: ITATTurkey stops all trades with Israel over GazaI-T- Provisions of Section 56(2)(vii)(a) cannot be invoked, where a necessary condition of the money received without consideration by assessee, has not been fulfilled: ITATGirl students advised by Pak college to keep away from political eventsI-T- As per settled position in law, cooperative housing society can claim deduction u/s 80P, if interest is earned on deposit of own funds in nationalised banks: ITATApple reports lower revenue despite good start of the yearI-T- Since difference in valuation is minor, considering specific exclusion provision benefit is granted to assessee : ITATHome-grown tech of thermal camera transferred to IndustryI-T - Presumption u/s 292C would apply only to person proceeded u/s 153A and not for assessee u/s 153C: ITATECI asks parties to cease registering voters for beneficiary-oriented schemes under guise of surveys
 
CX - Sub-section 35C(2A) did not give any power to grant stay; it only sought to put fetters on power of Tribunal to grant stay beyond certain period - with abolition of Sec 35C(2A) w.e.f 06.08.2014, power of Tribunal in no way got attenuated: CESTAT

By TIOL News Service

NEW DELHI, JUNE 25, 2015: A Miscellaneous Application was filed by the appellant seeking extension of the stay granted earlier. It is submitted that in spite of the earlier Stay Order, Revenue is insisting for recovery of the adjudged dues.

The AR took a stand that with effect from 06.08.2014 Section 35C(2A) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 has been abolished and, therefore, the Tribunal does not have any power to grant extension of stay.

The Bench inter alia observed -

++ The power to grant stay has not been expressly provided in the statute but is an inherent power Shri Ram Narayan Dyg. & Ptg. Mills 2009-TIOL-2413-CESTAT-AHM, Baldev Raj Ram Murthi 2005-TIOL-931-CESTAT-DEL.

++ It is evident that the power to grant stay, although not expressly provided (either before 06.08.2014 or with effect therefrom) in the Statute, it was and continues to be an inherent power of the Tribunal.

++ As regards the contention of the AR that with the abolition of Section 35C(2A) ibid the power of CESTAT to extend stay stands eclipsed, perusal of the sub-section clearly reveals that the said sub-section did not grant any power to grant stay; it only sought to put fetters on the power of the Tribunal to grant stay beyond a certain period.

++ Consequently, its abolition can only have an effect that fetters which the said sub-section sought to place on the Tribunal with regard to the duration beyond which CESTAT could not grant stay no longer exist. In other words, with the abolition of Section 35C(2A) ibid with effect from 06.08.2014, the power of the Tribunal with regard to grant of stay in no way got attenuated.

++ Even during the existence of sub-section 35C(2A) of the Act (i.e. prior to 06.08.2014), the Tribunal in the case of Halidram India Pvt. Ltd. 2014-TIOL-1965-CESTAT-DEL-LB held that the Tribunal had power to extend the stay beyond the period of 365 days in cases where appellant was ready and willing to pursue the appeal, but the Tribunal owing to the older pendency was unable to take up the appeal.

Rejecting the contention of the AR and having regard to the fact that the delay in taking up the appeal is not attributable to the appellants, the Bench extended the stay granted earlier.

(See 2015-TIOL-1239-CESTAT-DEL)


POST YOUR COMMENTS
   

TIOL Tube Latest

TIOL Tube
Shri N K Singh, recipient of TIOL FISCAL HERITAGE AWARD 2023, delivering his acceptance speech at Fiscal Awards event held on April 6, 2024 at Taj Mahal Hotel, New Delhi.

TOP NEWS

AR not Afar by SK Rahman

VISION 360



Shri Ram Nath Kovind, Hon'ble 14th President of India, addressing the gathering at TIOL Special Awards event.

TII LATEST

TIOLCORPLAWS LATEST