CESTAT appeals dismissed for non-compliance with Section 35B(2) of Central Excise Act.

The appeals against the order of CESTAT were dismissed due to non-compliance with Section 35B(2) of The Central Excise Act, 1944. The High Court emphasized the necessity of adhering to this section, stating that failure to comply renders any appeal not instituted in the eyes of the law. The judgment highlights the importance of complying with statutory provisions before initiating appeals against CESTAT orders to ensure the validity and admissibility of appeals. Compliance with legal procedures is crucial, as demonstrated in this case where non-compliance led to the dismissal of the appeals.

---

---

Issues:
Appeal against order of CESTAT based on non-compliance with Section 35B(2) of The Central Excise Act, 1944.

Analysis:
The judgment pertains to appeals filed against the order of the CESTAT, which were dismissed due to non-compliance with Section 35B(2) of The Central Excise Act, 1944. Section 35B(2) empowers the Committee of Commissioners of Central Excise to direct an authorized officer to appeal on its behalf to the Appellate Tribunal if it deems an order passed by the Appellate Commissioner or the Commissioner (Appeals) as not legal or proper. The Division Bench of the High Court, in a previous case, emphasized the necessity of compliance with this section, stating that failure to comply renders any appeal not instituted in the eyes of the law. This ruling is in line with the Supreme Court's decision in CCE, Vadodara vs. Rohit Pulp and Paper Mills, where it was held that compliance with Section 35B(2) is a prerequisite for directing a Central Excise Officer to file an appeal. As in the present case, where there was no compliance with Section 35B(2), and the documents presented did not indicate adherence to its provisions, the appeals were dismissed.

In conclusion, the judgment underscores the critical importance of complying with statutory provisions such as Section 35B(2) of The Central Excise Act, 1944, before initiating appeals against orders of the CESTAT. Failure to adhere to these requirements can result in the dismissal of appeals, as demonstrated in this case. Compliance with legal procedures and prerequisites is essential to ensure the validity and admissibility of appeals before the Appellate Tribunal.

---