https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=121935 The appeal filed under Section 35B of the Central Excise Act, 1944, was dismissed as non-maintainable by the Tribunal. The issue centered on the authorization for filing the appeal, with the respondent arguing that the authorization was invalid as it was signed by only one Commissioner. The Tribunal found that the Commissioner, who signed as the second Commissioner, held additional charges of two Commissionerates, contravening the provisions. Relying on precedent, the Tribunal concluded that the appeal lacked proper authorization and dismissed it, along with disposing of the cross-objection filed by the respondent. en-us Mon, 02 Jul 2007 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 01 Nov 2017 11:47:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=121935 The appeal filed under Section 35B of the Central Excise Act, 1944, was dismissed as non-maintainable by the Tribunal. The issue centered on the authorization for filing the appeal, with the respondent arguing that the authorization was invalid as it was signed by only one Commissioner. The Tribunal found that the Commissioner, who signed as the second Commissioner, held additional charges of two Commissionerates, contravening the provisions. Relying on precedent, the Tribunal concluded that the appeal lacked proper authorization and dismissed it, along with disposing of the cross-objection filed by the respondent. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 02 Jul 2007 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=121935