https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97768 Conflicting Tribunal views on the effect of statutory authorisation for filing a departmental appeal under section 35B led the Tribunal to treat the meaning of "not legal and proper" as an important maintainability question. Because prior decisions had taken opposite positions, including in light of Rohit Paper Mills, the Tribunal held that authoritative resolution was needed. The matter was therefore sent to the President for constitution of a Larger Bench to decide maintainability and related issues; no determination was made on the excise demand. en-us Fri, 16 Mar 2001 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 18 Jan 2012 10:26:04 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97768 Conflicting Tribunal views on the effect of statutory authorisation for filing a departmental appeal under section 35B led the Tribunal to treat the meaning of "not legal and proper" as an important maintainability question. Because prior decisions had taken opposite positions, including in light of Rohit Paper Mills, the Tribunal held that authoritative resolution was needed. The matter was therefore sent to the President for constitution of a Larger Bench to decide maintainability and related issues; no determination was made on the excise demand. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 16 Mar 2001 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97768