Jurisdiction under Inland Air Travel Tax Rules: revision to Central Government, not appeal to Tribunal, is the proper remedy.

Under the Inland Air Travel Tax Rules, 1989, a challenge to an order of the Commissioner (Appeals) lay by revision to the Central Government within six months under Rule 13. The Rules did not confer jurisdiction on the Tribunal to entertain an appeal against such an order, so the Tribunal could not assume appellate competence. A mistaken covering letter could not create jurisdiction in the Tribunal, though it might support an application for condonation of delay before the revisional authority. The proper remedy was therefore a revision petition before the Central Government, not an appeal before the Tribunal.

---

---

Issues: Whether an appeal lay to the Tribunal against the order passed under the Inland Air Travel Tax Rules, 1989, or whether the proper remedy was a revision petition before the Central Government.

Analysis: Rule 13 of the Inland Air Travel Tax Rules, 1989 vested power in the Central Government to entertain a revision petition against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) within six months. No provision under the Rules conferred jurisdiction on the Tribunal to entertain an appeal against such order. A mistaken covering letter could not create jurisdiction in the Tribunal, though it could furnish a basis for seeking condonation of delay before the revisional authority.

Conclusion: The appeal was not maintainable before the Tribunal and the proper remedy was a revision petition before the Central Government. The Tribunal had no jurisdiction to entertain the appeal.

---