Tribunal jurisdiction under special settlement schemes depends on express statutory appeal rights; no appeal lies without clear provision.

A special settlement scheme enacted under the Finance Act, 1998 did not form part of the Central Excise Act, 1944, the Customs Act, 1962, or the subordinate rules, and it contained no express provision conferring an appeal to the Tribunal against refusal to accept a declaration under the Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme, 1998. In the absence of statutory appellate jurisdiction, the Tribunal could not assume authority to entertain the appeal. The stated ratio is that where a special scheme does not expressly provide a right of appeal, the Tribunal lacks appellate jurisdiction unless such power is granted by clear statutory language.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Tribunal had jurisdiction to entertain an appeal against the refusal to accept a declaration filed under the Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme, 1998.

Analysis: The Scheme operated under the authority of the Finance Act, 1998 and did not form part of the Central Excise Act, 1944, the Customs Act, 1962, or the rules made thereunder. Since neither the Act nor the Scheme provided for an appeal to the Tribunal against the Deputy Commissioner's decision, no appellate jurisdiction could be assumed.

Conclusion: The Tribunal had no jurisdiction to entertain the appeal.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a special settlement scheme created under a Finance Act does not confer a right of appeal to the Tribunal, the Tribunal cannot assume appellate jurisdiction in the absence of an express statutory provision.

---