https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=202151 The Tribunal rejected the Revenue's appeal against the Commissioner (Appeals) order allowing the respondent to utilize unutilized Cenvat credit due to a procedural defect in the authorization process. The lack of a Review Committee decision, as required by Section 35B of the Central Excise Act, rendered the authorization defective. Emphasizing the mandatory nature of the Commissioner's opinion formation and the importance of procedural compliance, the Tribunal upheld the respondent's preliminary objection. The failure to involve the Review Committee led to the rejection of the appeal, highlighting the necessity of following statutory procedures in authorizing appeals under the Central Excise Act. en-us Tue, 12 Oct 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 28 Dec 2011 18:29:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=202151 The Tribunal rejected the Revenue's appeal against the Commissioner (Appeals) order allowing the respondent to utilize unutilized Cenvat credit due to a procedural defect in the authorization process. The lack of a Review Committee decision, as required by Section 35B of the Central Excise Act, rendered the authorization defective. Emphasizing the mandatory nature of the Commissioner's opinion formation and the importance of procedural compliance, the Tribunal upheld the respondent's preliminary objection. The failure to involve the Review Committee led to the rejection of the appeal, highlighting the necessity of following statutory procedures in authorizing appeals under the Central Excise Act. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 12 Oct 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=202151