https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85909 The Tribunal's rejection of the appeal based on the amended Section 35B(1) second proviso was deemed incorrect as the appellant had a vested substantive right of appeal under the old provision. The Vice President held that the amendment increasing the limit from Rs. 10,000 to Rs. 50,000 should not affect the appellant's right, emphasizing that the right of appeal is substantive and should be governed by the law at the time of filing. The Tribunal's order was recalled, and the appeal was directed to be heard on merits. en-us Thu, 01 Aug 1996 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 08 Aug 2011 18:25:08 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85909 The Tribunal's rejection of the appeal based on the amended Section 35B(1) second proviso was deemed incorrect as the appellant had a vested substantive right of appeal under the old provision. The Vice President held that the amendment increasing the limit from Rs. 10,000 to Rs. 50,000 should not affect the appellant's right, emphasizing that the right of appeal is substantive and should be governed by the law at the time of filing. The Tribunal's order was recalled, and the appeal was directed to be heard on merits. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 01 Aug 1996 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85909