9911796707
TMI Blog2006 (3) TMI 440X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Joint Commissioner respectively on the ground that they are not authorized officers by the adjudicating authority to file the appeals in terms of relevant statutory provisions. The findings recorded being identical, the para 4 - 7 arising in Order-in-Appeal No. 2/04-C.E., dated 22-9-2004 is reproduced herein below. An identical order has been passed in Order-in-Appeals No. 1 & 2/04, dated 22-9-2004. "4. I have carefully gone through the case records and examined the position. The Review Order No. 6/2001 dated 08-10-2001 in C.No.V/2/410/2000 (Rev) has recorded the grounds for opining that the impugned order is not "legal and proper", while directing and authorizing the Appellant, an authority lower than the adjudicating authority in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the officers sub-ordinate to a Commissioner of Customs or a Commissioner of Central Excise. As the law earlier stood, the executive Commissioner had the power to review any order passed by such a subordinate officer where he was of the impression that such order was neither legal nor proper. The law was specifically amended to afford greater protection to the assessees against the Revenue minded Commissioners whereby the power of review was taken away. Presently where the Commissioner is of the opinion that an order passed a sub-ordinate officer is required to be reviewed, he has to empower and authorise an officer of the same rank as the one who made doubtful order to file an application to the Commissioner (Appeals) to determine wheth ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... can also file appeal. The said proposition being against the express provision of law as analysed by the latter decisions of the Tribunal, the latter decisions including the ones cited by the Respondents have to be preferred. 4. Consequently, the Revenue Appeal deserves to be rejected. Hence rejected." 7. The cited case laws are squarely applicable to the instant appeal. Respectfully following the decisions taken by Hon. Tribunal, I hold that the instant Appeal has therefore been filed by improper authorization, and cannot be considered." 3. The learned Counsel submitted that the Single Member has no powers to differ from the judgment rendered by Supreme Court, as it amounts to a clear judicial indiscipline. He also submits tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
