Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Cegat

.....that the legislature intended that there would be automatic stay of recovery proceedings by bank under section 13(4) on filing an appeal by borrower under section 17. use of the expressions if and then under section 17 would not mean that the bank can take one or more measures laid down under section 13(4) only if the tribunal declares that the action taken already is in accordance with the provisions of the securitisation act and the rules made thereunder. use of the word if does not connote a condition precedent. it is a recognised rule of interpretation of statutes that expressions used therein should ordinarily be understood in a sense in which they harmonized with the object of the statute and which effectuate the object of the legislature. the provisions of section 17 must, therefore, receive such construction at the hands of the court as would advance the object and at any event not thwart it. in other words, the principle of purposive interpretation should be applied while construing the said provisions. the securitisation act is enacted to provide a speedy and summary remedy for recovery of thousands of crores which were due to the banks and financial institutions. order1. we have heard counsel for the revenue, and also perused the order of the tribunal. notification no. 16/94 has also been placed before us. that notification, inter alia states that it would be applicable, provided, the documents have been issued before 1st april, 1994 and the credit under rule 57g of the central excise rules has been taken on or before 30th june, 1994.2. the tribunal has held that failure to make the entry before 30th june regarding the credit would not disentitle the assessee from receiving the benefit of the notification. we are satisfied that the question of law raised by the revenue does require our consideration.3. the tribunal is directed to refer the following question of law :'whether the tribunal, in the circumstances, was right in holding that the assessee is entitled to the benefit of notification 16/94, despite credit having been taken after 30th june, 1994, the last date specified in that notification.'statement of the case together with the material documents shall be submitted to this court-ii by the tribunal.