2011 (4) TMI 947 - AT - Service Tax

Authorization by committee of commissioner - appeal before tribunal - held that - The intent and spirit of the law is that the committee has to thread bare examine the issues/points which has caused prejudice to the interest of Revenue and with proper reason shall come to a conclusion that the order appealed is neither legal or proper for which remedy of appeal by Revenue is to be sought. Unless such process known to law is followed, we shall have no hesitation to dismiss the appeal of Revenue, which otherwise shall perpetuate an irregularity.

Summary

Issues: Authorization process for appeal by Revenue, validity of undated authorization, proper application of law by the Committee

In this judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, New Delhi, the issue revolves around the authorization process for appeals by Revenue. The Tribunal highlighted the importance of proper authorization issued by the Committee of Commissioners. The judgment emphasized the significance of following the legal procedures diligently to avoid losing cases due to a casual approach and negligence in obtaining proper authorization. The Tribunal referenced a case where the Hon'ble High Court of Punjab and Haryana expressed concerns about Revenue losing cases due to similar issues. The Tribunal emphasized that authorizations must be issued properly in accordance with the law to be considered valid.

The judgment further delves into the specific case at hand, where an undated authorization was brought into question. The Tribunal expressed dissatisfaction with the cryptic, unreasoned, and undated authorization issued without proper application of mind by the Committee. The Tribunal emphasized that such authorizations, lacking proper examination of issues causing prejudice to the Revenue's interests, amount to empty formalities. The Tribunal stressed that the Committee must thoroughly examine the issues and provide valid reasons before issuing authorizations for appeals. Failure to follow this process, as mandated by law, could result in the dismissal of the appeal by Revenue, perpetuating irregularities. In this case, the Tribunal dismissed the Miscellaneous Application (ROA) due to the deficiencies in the authorization process and lack of proper application of law by the Committee.

Overall, the judgment underscores the importance of adhering to legal procedures and ensuring that authorizations for appeals are issued diligently and in accordance with the law. It highlights the necessity for Committees to thoroughly examine issues and provide valid reasons before granting authorizations to maintain the integrity of the appeal process and prevent irregularities that could lead to the dismissal of Revenue's appeals.