9911796707
TMI Blog1987 (2) TMI 236X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... resident (J)]. - By the present miscellaneous application the Appellant-Collector of Central Excise, Calcutta prays for setting aside or re-calling of the Bench Order No. 228/86-C dated 29-4-1986. By the said order the appeal filed by the Collector was rejected for failure to adduce evidence of compliance with requirement of authorisation or direction under sub-section (2) of Section 35-B of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... wer by the Tribunal for re-calling of the order. She also stated that for the purpose she relied on the decision of the Tribunal in Order No. 77/1985-A, Parties - The Collector of Central Excise Customs, Aurangabad v. M/s Vikram Belts Ltd., Ahmednagar, dated 25-9-1985. In this order the Tribunal while relying on Order 6 Rule 14 C.P.C. and Commentary on the same in Mulla s C.P.C at Page 997 held ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... written objection of the respondent. It is well settled that in the absence of specific provision to that effect Tribunal has no inherent power of review. As far Smt. Chander s reliance on the Tribunal Decision dated 25-9-1985 (Supra), in the said decision Tribunal while relying on Mulla s Commentary on C.P.C. observed as follows :- The signing of plaints is merely a matter of procedure. If a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ove observation assuming the compliance with requirement of Section 35-B(2) of the Act were taken as directory, does not help the appellant because as would be seen the defect was discovered before the order of rejecting the appeal was passed. The defect could be cured at that stage and not after the appeal had been rejected for this defect. 4. There is a proper stage when anything required to b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
