https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97329 A reference application under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act had to be filed by the Commissioner himself, and that statutory function could not be delegated to a Deputy Commissioner. Although the filing was treated as within limitation because the Tribunal accepted the receipt and filing dates, the decisive defect was lack of proper statutory authorisation to institute the reference. The Deputy Commissioner's filing on the basis of the Commissioner's authorisation was therefore ineffective, and the application was rejected as not maintainable. en-us Fri, 14 Sep 2001 00:00:00 +0530 Sun, 22 Jun 2025 08:36:41 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97329 A reference application under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act had to be filed by the Commissioner himself, and that statutory function could not be delegated to a Deputy Commissioner. Although the filing was treated as within limitation because the Tribunal accepted the receipt and filing dates, the decisive defect was lack of proper statutory authorisation to institute the reference. The Deputy Commissioner's filing on the basis of the Commissioner's authorisation was therefore ineffective, and the application was rejected as not maintainable. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 14 Sep 2001 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97329