Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + HC Service Tax - 2014 (4) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (4) TMI 403 - HC - Service TaxMaintainability of appeal before tribunal - recording of Satisfaction u/s 86 - clearance from the Committee of Chief Commissioners of Central Excise - Held that:- The fact that the Chief Commissioners did not, on the record, record independent reasons for concurring with their respective subordinates does not render the authorization void. There is no such requirement in Section 86(2), and this Court does not propose to add another layer to these administrative proceedings. Rather, it is important to view the proceedings as a whole - detailed notes considering the issue of appeal were prepared by those in the office of the Chief Commissioner delegated with such tasks, and the final decision or approval was taken by the Chief Commissioner. Short of requiring the Chief Commissioner himself to record independent reasons, there is no deficiency in the administrative action. Indeed, the rationale for Section 86(2) was considered by the Supreme Court in Collector of Central Excise v. Berger Paints [1990 (3) TMI 70 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] The precise method and manner of obtaining authorization is not an issue, but only a limited inquiry was permitted to determine whether such authorization was given in accordance with law, which, as discussed, is clearly the case in these proceedings. - Decision in Commissioner of Central Excise v. Ufan Chemicals, [2013 (5) TMI 703 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT] followed - Tribunal fell into error in holding that the appeal was not maintainable since the satisfaction as required by Section 86 had not been appropriately recorded. The impugned order is accordingly set aside - Decided in favour of Revenue.
|