Tribunal hierarchy and maintainability prevented a departmental appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) amid conflicting Tribunal orders.

A departmental appeal was found not maintainable before the Commissioner (Appeals) where the same dispute had already been decided by the Tribunal and conflicting Tribunal orders existed. The appellate authority noted that, despite being aware of the inconsistency, the Department neither sought rectification nor approached the proper higher forum to resolve the conflict. Since the Commissioner (Appeals) is subordinate to the Tribunal, the appeal could not be entertained in that posture, and the Department was required to pursue resolution before the Tribunal. The departmental appeal was therefore dismissed as legally untenable.

---

---

Issues: Whether the departmental appeal was maintainable before the Commissioner (Appeals) in view of the prior CESTAT order, the failure to seek rectification or approach the proper forum, and the conflicting Tribunal decisions on the same dispute.

Analysis: The order records that both sides had already pursued appeals before the Tribunal and that two different Tribunal outcomes had emerged on the same matter. The appellate authority noted that the Department, despite knowing of the inconsistency, neither sought rectification nor approached a higher forum to resolve it, and that the adjudicating authority had disregarded one of the Tribunal's orders. As the Commissioner (Appeals) is subordinate to the Tribunal, it was held that the appeal could not be entertained in that posture and that the Department had to seek resolution before the Tribunal.

Conclusion: The departmental appeal was not entertainable before the Commissioner (Appeals) and was dismissed as legally untenable.

---