AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
7 paragraphs · 242 wordsB.P. Jeevan Reddy, C.J.—Heard learned standing counsel for the Central Government.
Against the orders of the Assistant Collector Excise, rejecting the application for refund, the petitioner says, he filed an appeal before the Collector (Excise) along with stay application on 8.6.1990. The petitioner says that so far no orders have been passed on the stay application. Indeed, we are told that the Collector (Appeals) at Allahabad is not now functioning and that the Delhi Officer is Incharge of the said post. Be that as it may, the stay application shall be disposed of by the appropriate authority within six weeks from the production of a copy of this order before it. A copy of this order shall be produced before the authority concerned within one week.
For a period of two months from today the impugned recovery proceedings in pursuance of the order dated 22/23.5.1990, communicated on 9/10.7.1990, shall remain stayed.
If the stay application is not disposed of within the time, specified above, it shall be open to the petitioner to move this Court by way of Misc. application for appropriate orders.
This order shall not operate if the stay application has already been disposed of or if the copy of this order is not produced before the appellate authority within one
week.
A certified copy of this order may be given to learned Counsel for the petitioner on payment of usual charges within two days.