Reference application maintainability denied for delay and invalid signature, with authority limits not extending to references.

A reference application was held not maintainable because it was filed beyond time without sufficient explanation for the delay, and it was also unsigned by the Collector. Authorisation of the Assistant Collector under the appeals provision was found not to extend to reference applications, so the filing did not satisfy the governing requirement for a valid reference. The application was therefore treated as misconceived and rejected.

---

---

Issues: Whether the reference application was maintainable in view of the delay in filing and the absence of a valid signature by the Collector under the governing provision.

Analysis: The application was filed beyond time and no sufficient explanation for the delay was offered. It was also found that the Collector had not signed the reference application and that authorisation of the Assistant Collector under the provision relating to appeals before the Tribunal did not extend to reference applications. The matter was therefore treated as misconceived.

Conclusion: The reference application was not maintainable and was rejected.

---