By TIOL News Service

NEW DELHI, MAY 24, 2013: WITH the lofty objective of improving the quality of review by the department, the concept of review of the orders by the Committee of Commissioners or Committee of Chief Commissioners as the case may be was introduced. But in practice, the review is done by the Inspector / Superintendent of review Section and the next process is only appending the signatures by the next level officers. The Committees do not sit nor deliberate the issues.

In this appeal by department, the respondent raised a preliminary objection about the review order and the Tribunal called for the file. The noting on the file by the Inspector/Superintendent was as under:

"In view of above submissions, order-in-Appeal passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) in this case does not appear to be legal and proper, hence is not acceptable.

The Hon'ble Commissioner may like to file an appeal in the matter on the grounds mentioned above, if deemed fit.

Put up for perusal and orders please.

Draft Statement of facts and Grounds of appeal are put up for approval please.

Authorization letter in respect of Additional Commissioner (Review), Central Excise Hqrs . Indore is also put up for signature please."

Thereafter the file was placed before the higher officer, who recorded as under:-

"The above notes may kindly be perused. The OIA does not appear to be proper on the grounds discussed above. Appeal may be filed; And if so approved , Draft appeal putup for kind approval."

Thereafter the file was placed before the concerned officer who wrote the following note:

"The above note and the OIA may kindly be seen. As discussed above the OIA does not appear to be proper. If approved an appeal may be preferred before the CESTAT. Draft grounds for kind approval."

Thereafter the papers were examined by ADC (Rev) on 26.5.2005

who wrote as under:-

Note on pre-page may kindly be perused.

This case has been proposed for filing appeal before the Hon'ble CESTAT. As the Board has vide Notification No. 25/05 dated 13.05.2005 constituted Committee of two Commissioners as members to examine the Order-in-Appeals passed by the Commissioner (Appeals). Therefore, this case is to be examined by the Committee of two Commissioners (i.e. Commissioner, Central Excise, Bhopal and Commissioner, Central Excise, Indore)

Accordingly the Order-in-Appeal is put up for examination and approval for filing appeal."

Thereafter file stand simply signed by two Commissioners on two different dates .

By relying on two High Court decisions and a Tribunal order, the CESTAT held:

As we have already held that the notes were prepared by the Inspector and Superintendent and forwarded to the higher officers which in turn placed the file before the Committee of Commissioners. There is no independent recording of the fact that said Committee of Commissioners has gone through the impugned order and has arrived at a conclusion that the same need to be challenged before the Tribunal. As held by the High Court in the above referred matters, mere appending of signatures on the opinion of lower officers, by itself, is not sufficient compliance with the provisions of Section 35B. As such, we, by following the precedent decisions hold that the Revenue's appeal is not valid. The same is accordingly, rejected on the above preliminary ground.

(See 2013-TIOL-781-CESTAT-DEL)