2010 (5) TMI 431 - AT - Service Tax

Appeal - restoration of the application dismissed on the ground authorization was not proper - note sheet copy filed by department - One Commissioner has signed the note sheet on 1-12-2008 while the other signed on 4-12-2008 - Committee comprises more than one Member to be called as a Committee - no Committee on either of the dates for a decision - restoration application is bound to be dismissed

Summary

Issues: Restoration of application based on legal infirmity in Review order.

Analysis:
The judgment delivered by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, New Delhi, involved the issue of restoration of an application based on legal infirmity in a Review order. The Revenue sought restoration, but the respondent argued that the Tribunal had already passed an appropriate order based on an undated Review order accompanied by an Appeal Memo. The respondent contended that the authorization did not show any infirmity as prescribed by law. The Tribunal thoroughly examined the authorization before passing the order.

The Tribunal noted that an action of the past becomes incurable even with an affidavit at a later date. The application for restoration was accompanied by a note sheet indicating that the Committee of Commissioners decided on a specific date. However, one Commissioner signed the note sheet on a different date than the other Commissioner, indicating a lack of agreement or ad-idem. The Tribunal emphasized that what is required by law must be done in the manner known to law. A Committee must comprise more than one Member to be called a Committee. Therefore, if the Members decide on different dates, it signifies a lack of Committee on either date for a decision. Due to this legal infirmity in the Review order, the restoration application was dismissed.

Furthermore, the Tribunal highlighted the need for Revenue authorities to file maintainable appeals properly. Citing a case from the Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court, the Tribunal emphasized the repeated instances of the Revenue's casual approach leading to appeals being dismissed for lack of proper authorization. The Tribunal urged Revenue authorities to take necessary steps to safeguard the interest of Revenue by filing appeals in a proper and maintainable manner. The judgment was dictated and pronounced in open court, emphasizing the importance of adhering to legal procedures and authorizations in such matters.