Fresh appeal against a finalised order not maintainable after earlier rejection for want of authorisation

A fresh appeal against the same order was found not maintainable where the Revenue's earlier appeal had already been rejected as filed by an unauthorized officer and had attained finality. Applying its prior decisions, CESTAT held that once an appeal against an impugned order is rejected, no restoration or second appeal against that same order can be entertained. The accompanying application for condonation of delay also failed because the subsequent appeal itself was incompetent. The fresh appeal and condonation application were therefore rejected.

---

---

Issues: Whether a fresh appeal with an application for condonation of delay was maintainable against the same order after the Revenue's earlier appeal had already been rejected as not maintainable.

Analysis: The earlier appeal against the same impugned order had been rejected by the Tribunal as having been filed by an unauthorized officer. The Tribunal relied on its prior decisions holding that once an appeal stands rejected and the order attains finality, no restoration or fresh appeal against the same order can be entertained. On that basis, the Tribunal found that the subsequent appeal against the same order could not be admitted.

Conclusion: The fresh appeal and the condonation application were not maintainable and were rejected.

---