2012 (9) TMI 567 - AT - Central Excise

Application for restoration of appeal Held that - Only ground in support of the appeal taken in the grounds of appeal is that the opinion of the Committee of Commissioner of Customs was available on the file notings and the appeal was filed under the signatures of the Commissioner who was a Member of the Committee. It has been suggested that the aforesaid fact was not placed before the Tribunal and the only defect was that no formal authorisation order was made - there was not properly maintainable appeal filed at the original stage, there cannot be any repair to be done to the lapse of Revenue by this MA (ROM). Accordingly that is rejected.

Summary

Issues:
1. Restoration of appeal based on authorization by Committee.
2. Compliance with provisions of Section 129-A of the Customs Act, 1962.
3. Evaluation and examination by the Committee for filing an appeal.
4. Procedural lapses leading to dismissal of Revenue's appeal.

Issue 1: Restoration of appeal based on authorization by Committee
The judgment deals with the issue of restoring an appeal by the Revenue based on the authorization by the Committee. The Tribunal dismissed the appeal as it found that one Commissioner did not date the authorization, while the other dated it as 30th April 2008. The Revenue argued for restoration, presenting the record showing approval for filing the appeal by the Committee. However, the note sheet did not reveal any order passed by the Committee, indicating a lack of application of mind. The Tribunal observed multiple lapses by the Revenue, leading to the loss of the appeal remedy due to a casual approach and negligence.

Issue 2: Compliance with provisions of Section 129-A of the Customs Act, 1962
The Tribunal analyzed whether the appeal was compliant with Section 129-A of the Customs Act, 1962. The Tribunal noted that the order of the Tribunal was refused based on the absence of authorization by the Committee for the appeal to be filed by the Revenue. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of the Committee's authorization, as mandated by law since 31st March 2005. The Tribunal criticized the Revenue's casual approach in addressing the defect despite the clear legal requirements, leading to the dismissal of the appeal.

Issue 3: Evaluation and examination by the Committee for filing an appeal
The judgment highlighted the significance of evaluation and examination by the Committee for filing an appeal. Referring to a previous case, the Tribunal emphasized that the Committee must apply its mind and form an opinion before filing an appeal. The Tribunal cited a case where the High Court concluded that without proper evaluation and examination by the Committee, an appeal cannot be considered as instituted according to the provisions of the Customs Act, 1962. The judgment stressed the necessity of a thorough review process by the Committee before initiating an appeal.

Issue 4: Procedural lapses leading to dismissal of Revenue's appeal
The Tribunal addressed the procedural lapses that led to the dismissal of the Revenue's appeal. It noted that the appeal was not properly maintainable from the beginning due to the absence of a formal authorization order by the Committee. Consequently, the Tribunal rejected any attempt to repair the lapse through a Miscellaneous Application. The judgment underscored the importance of procedural compliance and the adverse consequences of repeated lapses by the Revenue in pursuing appeals.