- (1.) We have heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and learned counsel for the respondents.
(2.) In D.B. Civil Misc. Writ Petition No.7486/2014- M/s Rathi TMT Saria Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union of India & Ors., and other connected writ petitions, the petitioners have prayed for directions to quash the orders/letters of recovery and attachment, issued by the respondents, on the expiry of the interim orders passed by the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (for short, 'the CESTAT'), with conditions of pre-deposit under Section 35C(2A) of the Central Excise Act, 1944, which provides that waiver of pre-deposit of the assessed demand, cannot be extended by the CESTAT beyond 365 days.
(3.) In D.B. Central Excise Appeal Nos.19/2014 and 20/2014, between the Commissioner of Central Excise and M/s KEC International Ltd., the Central Excise Department has raised a substantial question of law for determination of the High Court as follows:- "Whether the Hon'ble CESTAT was right in law in allowing the Miscellaneous Application filed by respondents, overlooking the insertion of third proviso in Section 35C(2A) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 vide Finance Act, 2013 and thereafter by wrongly applying the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court pronounced in the case of Commissioner of Customs Central Excise, Ahmedabad vs. Kumar Cotton Mills Pvt. Ltd., 2005 180 ELT 434, vide which the Interim Stay as granted vide Stay Order No.ST/1737-1738 of 2012 dated 09.10.2012 has been ordered to be continued until further orders?";