https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=74530 An appeal to the Appellate Tribunal under Section 35B(2) required a valid, order-specific authorisation based on the Collector's prior opinion that the impugned order was not legal or proper; a blanket authority issued after the appeal was filed did not satisfy that statutory requirement, so the appeal was incompetent. The request for condonation of delay also failed because no sufficient cause was shown: no steps were taken within the limitation period, and later office inconveniences were not enough to excuse the delay. The appeal was therefore rejected on both maintainability and limitation grounds. en-us Mon, 23 Nov 1987 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 09 Jun 2011 14:46:31 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=74530 An appeal to the Appellate Tribunal under Section 35B(2) required a valid, order-specific authorisation based on the Collector's prior opinion that the impugned order was not legal or proper; a blanket authority issued after the appeal was filed did not satisfy that statutory requirement, so the appeal was incompetent. The request for condonation of delay also failed because no sufficient cause was shown: no steps were taken within the limitation period, and later office inconveniences were not enough to excuse the delay. The appeal was therefore rejected on both maintainability and limitation grounds. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 23 Nov 1987 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=74530