9911796707
TMI Blog1983 (12) TMI 276X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... i Sud, Advocates, for the Respondent. ORDER Before the arguments on the merits of appeal commenced, Shri Khaitan raised a preliminary objection that the appeal filed by the appellant on 9-5-1983 was not a valid appeal as it had been presented without compliance with the provisions contained in sub-section (1) of Section 35E of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 (for short the Act). Sh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Excise, Calcutta. It was submitted that through an oversight this letter was addressed from Government of India although on file a Member of the Board had passed the necessary order directing the Collector of Central Excise, Calcutta, to prefer the appeal. It was further pointed out that non-mentioning of the section of the Act was through an oversight and it was purely a procedural lapse. In the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... an order has been passed by the Board. We also do not agree with Shri Khader that the requirement of the Board passing an order under sub-section (1) of Section 35E of the Act or an appeal being filed to the Appellate Tribunal in pursuance of the order as provided for in sub-section (4) are merely directory and an empty formality. A reading of the two sub-sections leaves no doubt that the complia ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ndia. When a copy of the order has been filed along with the memo of appeal, the Tribunal cannot overlook it and ignore the fact that it is not an order passed by the Board but only communication from Government of India. Therefore, when the appellant filed memo of appeal on 9-5-1983 there was no compliance with the requirement of sub-sections (1) and (4) of Section 35E of the Act. The appeal file ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the Act. It is therefore, filed as infrectuous. Notice if taken of the appeal filed subsequently on 3-11-1983. This appeal is to be treated as newly filed and should be assigned a new number by the Registry. Shri Khaitan, learned Counsel for the Respondent orally informed that he had taken notice of this appeal filed on 3-11-1983. Both Shri Khader for the Appellant and Shri Khaitan for the Resp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
