Mandatory pre-appeal review by Commissioner committee is required; Revenue appeals filed without it were not maintainable.

Under the amended appellate procedure, a Revenue appeal against an order of the lower authority required a prior review by a Committee of Commissioners on the legality of that order. As no such review order accompanied the appeals and they were filed only under the Commissioner's signature, the filing did not satisfy the mandatory statutory requirement. The appeals were therefore held not maintainable and dismissed, leaving the Commissioner (Appeals)' order undisturbed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Revenue appeals were maintainable in the absence of a review order by a Committee of Commissioners under the amended appellate procedure.

Analysis: The appeals were filed after the amendment to Section 35B of the Central Excise Act, 1944 became operative. Under the amended scheme, an appeal against an order of the lower authority required a prior review by a Committee of Commissioners forming an opinion on the legality of the order. No such review order accompanied the appeals, and the appeals were filed only under the signature of the Commissioner. In the absence of the mandatory review, the appellate filing was not in conformity with the amended statutory requirement.

Conclusion: The appeals were not maintainable and were dismissed.

Final Conclusion: The Revenue's challenge failed on the threshold issue of maintainability, and the impugned order of the Commissioner (Appeals) remained undisturbed.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the statute requires prior review by a Committee of Commissioners before filing an appeal, an appeal filed without such review is not maintainable.

---