Wrong-forum appeal papers may be transferred to the proper appellate authority, even though the original appeal is incompetent.

An appeal against an Assistant Collector's order lay to the Appellate Collector, not to the Board, and no appellate or revisional competence existed before the Board on the facts stated, so the appeals were incompetent. On the forum question, the Tribunal could nonetheless transmit papers to the jurisdictional Collector (Appeals) rather than return them, because the statute and rules did not expressly bar such course and the Supreme Court had treated transfer to the proper authority, subject to limitation, as permissible guidance. The result was that the wrong-forum filing did not become maintainable, but the appeal papers could be made over to the competent appellate authority for action according to law.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether an appeal or revision lay to the Board against the Assistant Collector's order; (ii) whether, on finding the appeals to be incompetent, the Tribunal could transfer the papers to the jurisdictional Collector (Appeals) instead of returning them to the appellants.

Issue (i): Whether an appeal or revision lay to the Board against the Assistant Collector's order.

Analysis: The order under challenge was passed by the Assistant Collector. On the statutory scheme then in force, appeals against such orders lay to the Appellate Collector and not to the Board, while revisional power, where available, was not vested in the Board against an Assistant Collector's order. The filed appeals were therefore presented before a forum lacking appellate or revisional competence.

Conclusion: The appeals before the Board were incompetent and not maintainable.

Issue (ii): Whether, on finding the appeals to be incompetent, the Tribunal could transfer the papers to the jurisdictional Collector (Appeals) instead of returning them to the appellants.

Analysis: The Tribunal's power had to be traced to the statute and the rules. A general power of transfer was not expressly conferred by the governing enactments, but the Supreme Court had, in a wrong-forum matter, directed that appeal papers be made over to the proper authority subject to limitation. That approach was treated as binding guidance. The contrary view, relying on the absence of an express transfer provision and on the need to return papers to the litigant, was rejected by the majority.

Conclusion: The Tribunal could lawfully make over the appeal papers to the Collector (Appeals), subject to any limitation objection.

Final Conclusion: The majority held that the appeals were not competent, but the papers were to be transmitted to the jurisdictional Collector (Appeals) so that the appellants' remedy could be pursued according to law.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a proceeding is filed before a wrong forum and the statute is silent on transfer, the appellate body may, in appropriate cases, make over the papers to the competent authority subject to limitation, but an appeal remains incompetent if instituted before a forum lacking appellate jurisdiction.

---