2009 (1) TMI 506 - AT - Central Excise

Review Petition Maintainability, before Textiles Cess Appellant Tribunal - Tribunal not vested with the power of Review under the Statute and, therefore, it cannot exercise jurisdiction of the review and as such, the petition filed by the Petitioner for Review of the Order not maintainable under the law and, therefore, the Review Petition is rejected

Summary

Issues:
1. Maintainability of Review Petition under Textiles Committee Act, 1963.

Analysis:
The judgment revolves around the issue of the maintainability of a Review Petition under the Textiles Committee Act, 1963. The Petitioner filed a Review Petition challenging an Order dated 24th October, 2008. The Respondent argued that there is no provision under the Act for filing a Review Application. The Counsel cited the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, which specifically vests the power of Review with the Administrative Tribunal, unlike the Textiles Committee Act. Various legal precedents were presented to support the argument, emphasizing that unless the power of Review is explicitly provided for in the Statute, the Tribunal cannot review its decision.

The judgment delves into the principle that the Textiles Cess Appellate Tribunal, being a creation of Statute, can only exercise its jurisdiction and functions as specified under the Act and Rules. Reviewing its own decision without specific statutory authority would amount to overstepping its jurisdiction and contravening the law. The Judge, after considering the arguments from both sides, concluded that the Tribunal is not empowered to conduct a Review under the Statute. Consequently, the Review Petition filed by the Petitioner was deemed not maintainable and was rejected.

In conclusion, the judgment clarifies that the Textiles Committee Act, 1963 does not provide for the power of Review by the Textiles Cess Appellate Tribunal. The decision highlights the importance of statutory provisions in determining the jurisdiction and authority of Tribunals, emphasizing that without explicit statutory authorization, the Tribunal cannot review its own decisions. The judgment serves as a reminder of the limitations imposed by the law on the Tribunal's powers, ensuring adherence to legal procedures and upholding the integrity of the legal framework.