9911796707
TMI Blog1987 (6) TMI 297X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... resident]. - This purported appeal has been filed by the Deputy Collector (I) of Central Excise, Calcutta against the order-in-Appeal noted above. The Memorandum of Appeal and the verification have been signed by the Deputy Collector. The authorisation by the Collector, as required in terms of Section 35B(2) of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 ( the Act , for short), has not been enclose ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ore us an authorisation issued by the Collector in the name of the Deputy Collector. It is, however, post dated having been signed on 4-10-1983, the appeal itself having been filed in March, 1983. The Sr. D.R. submitted that since an authorisation had now been produced, the Collector should be deemed to have ratified the filing of this appeal by the Deputy Collector and the procedural lacuna in no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f approaching the Central Government for review of the order should be deemed to be as good as an authorisation to file an appeal to this Tribunal in the changed circumstances. The lack of contemporaneous formal authorisation is only a procedural lacuna which could be overlooked and the appeal entertained on the basis of the authorisation presently filed. 7. As we have already noted, the appeal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l time. We do not think that this consideration and the note recorded by the Collector on the basis of such consideration amount to an opinion as envisaged by Section 35B(2). At the material time, when the Collector recorded his note, there was no statutory provision regarding the Collector forming an opinion that the Appellate Collector s order was not legal or proper and directing an application ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
