VVF LIMITED Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Whether the CESTAT was justified in declining to stay the order-in-appeal dated 25th November 2010 and order-in-original dated 25th November 2010 is the question raised in this appeal. By the impugned order dated 14th February 2012, the CESTAT has merely quoted the reasoning of Commissioner (Appeals) but has not recorded its prima facie view on the reasoning given by the Commissioner (Appeals). Unless, the prima facie view of the CESTAT is recorded, it is not possible to ascertain the basis on which the CESTAT has declined to grant stay. Hence, the impugned order dated 14th February 2012 is quashed and set aside insofar as it relates to declining the stay to the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) and the matter is restored to the file of the CESTAT for fresh consideration of the aforesaid issue.

(2.) The appeal is accordingly disposed off with no order as to costs.