1994 (7) TMI 176 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
- Maintainability of the appeal against the order passed by the Assistant Collector under Section 35 of the Central Excises and Salt Act.
- Jurisdiction of the Appellate Tribunal to entertain the appeal without exhausting the remedy under Section 35 of the Act.

Analysis:
1. Maintainability of the appeal against the order passed by the Assistant Collector:
The applicants argued that the order passed by the Assistant Collector is connected and in continuation with the earlier order passed by the Collector, against which they have already filed an appeal pending before the Tribunal. They relied on a previous decision where it was held that the appellate authorities have wide powers to issue directions regarding future levies and grant interim relief under the proviso to Section 35F. The applicants contended that the appeal should be admitted to avoid multiplicity of proceedings and undue hardship. However, the Revenue argued that the proper course of action for an aggrieved party by the Assistant Collector's order is to file an appeal to the Collector (Appeals) under Section 35 of the Act.

2. Jurisdiction of the Appellate Tribunal:
The Tribunal examined the provisions of Section 35B of the Act, which specify the orders against which an appeal can be made to the Appellate Tribunal. It was noted that an appeal lies to the Collector (Appeals) against the order passed by the Assistant Collector under Section 35, and only after exhausting this remedy can an appeal be made to the Tribunal. The Tribunal emphasized that unless a specific right of appeal is granted under the statute, it cannot be bypassed or inferred. The Tribunal clarified that it is bound by the statutory provisions and cannot assume a wider jurisdiction beyond what is provided in the law. The Tribunal rejected the argument that inherent powers could be exercised in this case, as the statutory remedy of appealing to the Collector (Appeals) against the Assistant Collector's order must be followed.

3. Conclusion:
The Tribunal held that the present appeal was not maintainable as the applicants had not exhausted the remedy under Section 35 of the Act by appealing to the Collector (Appeals) against the order passed by the Assistant Collector. Therefore, both the appeal and the stay application were rejected. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of following the statutory appeal process and respecting the hierarchy of adjudicatory authorities as outlined in the Central Excises and Salt Act.