Departmental appeal authorisation is valid when Commissioners apply their minds, even if signatures are recorded on different dates.

A departmental appeal under Section 35B(2) is maintainable when the Committee of Commissioners has applied its mind and authorised the filing of the appeal; there is no statutory requirement that both Commissioners must sign on the same day or sit together when recording that decision. The Tribunal cannot, in the absence of any objection by the respondent, probe the internal manner of authorisation and treat staggered signatures as fatal, as that would exceed the limited object of the authorisation inquiry and amount to jurisdictional error. The authorisation also covered the penalty issue under Section 11AC, so the departmental challenge could not be rejected as invalid.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Appellate Tribunal could reject a departmental appeal as not maintainable on the ground that the Committee of Commissioners had authorised the filing of the appeal on different dates and whether, in the absence of any objection from the respondent, the Tribunal could enquire into the validity of such authorisation.

Analysis: Section 35B(2) permits a departmental appeal when the Committee of Commissioners is of the opinion that the impugned order is not legal or proper and authorises filing of the appeal. The requirement is an application of mind by the Committee to the desirability of appeal. There is no statutory requirement that both Commissioners must sign on the same day or sit together at the same time. The Tribunal, in the absence of any objection from the respondent, could not embark upon an enquiry into the internal manner in which the authorisation was recorded and treat staggered signatures as fatal. Such an approach exceeded the limited object of authorisation and amounted to a jurisdictional error. The merits of the departmental challenge were also not absent, as the issue of penalty under Section 11AC had been noticed in the authorisation.

Conclusion: The Tribunal was not justified in dismissing the appeal for want of valid authorisation, and its orders were liable to be set aside.

Final Conclusion: The appeals succeeded, the Tribunal's orders were annulled, and the matters were sent back for decision on merits in accordance with law.

Ratio Decidendi: A departmental appeal is valid if the Committee of Commissioners has applied its mind and authorised filing of the appeal; the Tribunal cannot invalidate such authorisation merely because the signatures were affixed on different dates or because the respondent raised no objection.

---