Departmental appeal maintainability depends on valid Collector authorisation reflecting a statutory opinion that the order is not legal or proper.

A departmental appeal under Section 35B(2) of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 is maintainable only if the Collector's authorisation reflects a clear statutory opinion that the impugned order is not legal or proper. Where the authorisation does not show application of mind to that prerequisite, it is not in the form contemplated by the statute and the appeal cannot proceed. On that basis, the appeal was treated as not maintainable and rejected on the preliminary objection.

---

---

Issues: Whether the departmental appeal was maintainable in the absence of a valid authorisation under Section 35B(2) of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944.

Analysis: The authorisation issued by the Collector was found not to conform to the statutory requirement. The provision requires the Collector to form an opinion that the impugned order is not legal or proper before directing an authorised officer to appeal. On scrutiny, the authorisation did not show clear application of mind by the Collector to that prerequisite, and therefore it was not in the proper form contemplated by the statute.

Conclusion: The appeal was held to be not maintainable and was rejected on the preliminary objection.

Ratio Decidendi: A departmental appeal under Section 35B(2) of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 is maintainable only when the Collector's authorisation reflects a clear statutory opinion that the impugned order is not legal or proper.

---