Revenue appeal authorisation must show Commissioner's application of mind before filing under Central Excise law.

A Revenue appeal under the Central Excise Act was held not maintainable because the record did not show a valid authorisation reflecting the Commissioner's application of mind or requisite opinion that the order-in-appeal was not legal or proper. The authorisation itself was deficient, and no review sheet or other material demonstrated compliance with the statutory precondition for filing the appeal. On that basis, the preliminary objection succeeded and the appeal was rejected.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Revenue appeal was maintainable in the absence of a valid authorisation showing that the Commissioner had applied his mind and formed the requisite opinion under Section 35B(2) of the Central Excise Act.

Analysis: The authorisation placed on record did not state that the impugned order was not legal or proper. The file also did not contain a review sheet or other material showing that the Commissioner had examined the order-in-appeal and recorded the necessary opinion. In the absence of such application of mind and in view of the Supreme Court ruling relied upon, the precondition for filing the appeal was not satisfied.

Conclusion: The appeal was not maintainable and was rejected on the preliminary objection.

---