ORDER
1. Heard. Sole prayer of the petitioner in this petition is that till 29-3-2001 when the petitioner’s application for stay pending consideration of the Customs, Excise and Gold Control Appellate Tribunal is taken up, no coercive action should be taken. Learned counsel for the respondent submitted that till now there is no order of stay and therefore, there is no bar on the departmental authorities resorting to recovery proceedings. It is also submitted that the petitioner has not made out a case for grant of stay during pendency of the reference application. It appears that Tribunal’s order is dated 7-12-2000. On 13-2-2001, notice has been issued to the respondent in the reference application. The only question which remains to be seen is whether there should be stay of recovery during pendency of the reference application. In view of the decision of the Apex Court in CIT v. Bansi Dhar and Sons, 1986 (24) E.L.T. (193), application for stay, if any, has to be considered by Tribunal. It is not in dispute that the application for stay has been filed and the matter is listed on 29-3-2001. Though there is no order of stay operating, it would be fair and proper if no coercive action is taken till the Tribunal takes up the matter on 29-3-2001.
2. We make it clear that by giving protection for six days, we are not expressing any opinion on the merits of the application which is to be adjudicated by the Tribunal.
3. The petition is disposed of.