https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=88520 A Revenue appeal under the Central Excises & Salt Act was held not maintainable because the Commissioner had not given proper authorisation under Section 35B(2). The statutory requirement is that the Commissioner must form a conscious opinion that the impugned order is not legal or proper and must direct an authorised officer to appeal on his behalf. As the record showed no clear application of mind or valid approval to file the appeal, the authorisation requirement was not satisfied and the appeal was dismissed. en-us Tue, 03 Feb 1998 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 19 Sep 2011 14:33:02 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=88520 A Revenue appeal under the Central Excises & Salt Act was held not maintainable because the Commissioner had not given proper authorisation under Section 35B(2). The statutory requirement is that the Commissioner must form a conscious opinion that the impugned order is not legal or proper and must direct an authorised officer to appeal on his behalf. As the record showed no clear application of mind or valid approval to file the appeal, the authorisation requirement was not satisfied and the appeal was dismissed. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 03 Feb 1998 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=88520