9911796707
TMI Blog2006 (8) TMI 65X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uty Commissioner not maintainable - CEAC No. 24 of 2005, - - - Dated:- 24-8-2006 - [Order]. - The Revenue is aggrieved by an order dated 10th December, 2004 passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal in Appeal No. E/2979/04-NBSC. 2.The short issue in this case is that the adjudicating Authority (Joint Commissioner) passed an order which was considered by the Commissioner ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Commissioner (Appeals). That is how the matter is now before us. Section 35E(2) and Section 35E(4) of the Act read as follows :- 35-E. Powers of Board or Commissioner of Central Excise to pass certain orders. (1) xxx xxx xxx (2) The Commissioner of Central Excise may, of his own motion, call for and examine the record of any proceeding in which an adjudicating authorities subor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d by the Appellate Tribunal or the Commissioner (Appeals), as the case may be, as if such application were an appeal made against the decision or order of the adjudicating authority and the provisions of this Act regarding appeals, including the provisions of sub-section (4) of Section 35B shall, so far as may be, apply to such application" 3.The contention of learned Counsel for the Revenue is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e adjudicating authority or by any other authorised officer. That authorised officer, it appears to us will have to be authorised by the adjudicating authority after a direction given to the adjudicating authority. What has happened in the present case is that the Commissioner did not issue any direction to the adjudicating authority under Section 35E(2) of the Act; he directly authorised the Depu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
