Locus standi under Central Excise appeal law barred a subordinate Collector from challenging the Board's own order.

Section 35B of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 was construed to limit appeals to a "person aggrieved" competent in law to challenge the order in question. An authority subordinate to the Central Board of Excise and Customs was held not to fall within that class when seeking to appeal against the Board's own order. The Board's internal sanction could not cure this lack of competence, because sanction cannot confer locus standi where the statute does not permit it. The Collector was therefore not entitled to maintain the appeal, and the preliminary objection succeeded.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Collector of Central Excise had locus standi to maintain an appeal to the Tribunal against the order of the Central Board of Excise and Customs under section 35B of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944.

Analysis: The Tribunal treated the controversy as turning on the meaning of the expression "any person aggrieved" in section 35B of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944. Following the view that an authority subordinate to the Board could not appeal against the Board's own order, it held that the Collector, being subordinate to the Central Board of Excise and Customs, was not within the class of persons entitled to appeal. The fact that the Board had granted sanction did not cure the defect, because the Board could not validly sanction an appeal against its own order.

Conclusion: The Collector had no locus standi to file the appeal, and the preliminary objection was upheld.

Ratio Decidendi: Under section 35B of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944, an authority subordinate to the Central Board of Excise and Customs is not a "person aggrieved" competent to appeal against the Board's own order, and internal sanction by the Board cannot confer such competence.

---