2001 (7) TMI 552 - AT - Central Excise

Tribunal clarifies second order by Collector set aside, first order not appealed remains untouched.

The Tribunal clarified that the order referred to in paragraph 4 was the second order passed by the Collector, which was set aside. The first order, not ... Order becomes an order in law once signed - non-communication of an adjudication order does not render it without force - communication is an administrative act - appeal under Section 129D of the Act - tribunal's competence to set aside only a subsequent/communicated order - second order passed by the Collector is non estSecond order passed by the Collector is non est - tribunal's competence to set aside only a subsequent/communicated order - non-communication of an adjudication order does not render it without force - Scope of the phrase 'that order' in paragraph 4 of the Tribunal's order. - HELD THAT: - The Tribunal construed paragraph 4 as referring to the second order passed by the Collector. Paragraph 3 explains the legal premise that once the Collector has passed and signed an order it is an order in law and that mere non-communication does not deprive such an order of legal force, communication being only an administrative act. On that basis the Tribunal held that the second order was non est and could be set aside. The Court clarifies that, given the wording and sequence of the Tribunal's reasoning, 'that order' in paragraph 4 can only mean the second order of the Collector; the Tribunal had no competence to set aside the first (uncommunicated) order because it had not been communicated and no appeal lay against it before the Tribunal. [Paras 3, 4]The phrase 'that order' in paragraph 4 refers to the second order passed by the Collector, which the Tribunal set aside; the Tribunal could not have set aside the first uncommunicated order.Final Conclusion: Clarification granted: 'that order' in paragraph 4 means the second order passed by the Collector, which the Tribunal set aside; the first uncommunicated order was not within the Tribunal's competence to be set aside. The Commissioner sought clarification on the scope of the Tribunal's order. The Tribunal clarified that the order referred to in paragraph 4 was the second order passed by the Collector, which was set aside. The first order, not communicated or appealed against, could not be dealt with by the Tribunal. The clarification provided should suffice.