2011 (9) TMI 710 - AT - Central Excise

Appeal by revenue - preliminary objection clearly speaks that there was an empty formality followed by the Revenue authorities reviewing the matter leaving the annexure to others those who have no power to be a member of the Committee, but authenticated the annexure 1 &2. Such a pitiable condition of Revenue has made it non suiter due to scanty regard to law. - Fundamental element of formation of opinion of filing the appeal is missing then no appeal is deemed to be instituted in the eyes of law.

Summary

Issues:
Review order authentication, Annexure authenticity, Revenue authority's casual approach, Maintainability of appeals.

Review Order Authentication:
The counsel for the respondent raised a preliminary objection regarding the authentication of the annexure to the review order, stating that it was not authenticated by the review authorities who were different from the signatory of the annexure. The counsel pointed out that the annexure appeared after the review order was passed, indicating a procedural irregularity. The Tribunal observed that the annexure was not an integral part of the review order, highlighting a lack of proper authentication and procedural adherence by the Revenue authorities.

Annexure Authenticity:
The Tribunal noted that the annexure 1 & 2, which were crucial to the case, were not before the review authorities when they passed the order. The counsel emphasized that the annexure was introduced after the review order, suggesting a lack of authenticity and procedural irregularity. This discrepancy in the presentation of essential documents raised doubts about the completeness and accuracy of the review process followed by the Revenue authorities.

Revenue Authority's Casual Approach:
The Tribunal criticized the Revenue authorities for their casual approach in reviewing the matter, highlighting a lack of adherence to legal procedures. Referring to a previous judgment, the Tribunal noted that repetitive irregularities in Revenue cases had been observed by the Hon'ble High Court. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of following proper procedures and maintaining the integrity of the review process to ensure the legality and validity of the decisions made by Revenue authorities.

Maintainability of Appeals:
Based on the procedural irregularities and lack of authentication in the review process, the Tribunal concluded that the appeals filed by the Revenue were not maintainable. Citing the noticeable features of the case, the Tribunal dismissed both appeals of the Revenue on the grounds of procedural lapses and non-adherence to legal requirements. The decision to dismiss the appeals was based on the fundamental principle that legal procedures must be followed diligently to maintain the integrity and validity of the review process.

In conclusion, the judgment highlighted the importance of proper authentication, adherence to legal procedures, and the maintenance of integrity in the review process by Revenue authorities. The decision to dismiss the appeals was based on the procedural irregularities and lack of authenticity in the documentation presented during the review, emphasizing the significance of upholding legal standards and ensuring the validity of decisions made in such cases.