COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE Vs. R.C. INDUSTRIES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal filed by Revenue.

(2.) AT the outset, Shri K.S. Ravi Shankar, learned Advocate raised primary objection that authorisation is neither legal nor proper. He submitted that since the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), the Commissioner has to give authorisation in terms of Section 35B(2) and not under Section 35E (2). He said that Section 35E(2) envisages only filing of appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) by the Commissioner in case he is not satisfied with the order passed by the subordinates. He said that since the order was duly passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), the authorisation for filing of appeal before the Appellate Tribunal was required to be filed in terms of Section 35B(2) and not under Section 35E(2). In this context, he drew our attention to relevant Section 35E(2) and 35B(2) of Central Excise Act, 1944, which reads as under -

(3.) SHRI Narasimha Murthy JDR for Revenue submitted that there was only procedural lapse on the part of the Commissioner in filing the authorisation under Section 35E(2) and non -mentioning of right Section should not take away of substantial right of filing an appeal and accordingly he requested that objection raised by the other side may be over -ruled. He also placed relevant note sheet order in filing the appeal.