https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51039 A curable defect in an appeal memo, such as the absence of the appellants' signatures on the memo of appeal and verification, cannot justify dismissal without first allowing rectification. Where the appeal papers were signed by authorised counsel under vakalatnama and no opportunity was given to cure the defect, rejection on that technical ground was unjustified. The appellate order was therefore set aside, and the matter was remanded for removal of the defect and fresh adjudication in accordance with law. en-us Fri, 19 Oct 2001 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 22 Sep 2010 13:14:57 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51039 A curable defect in an appeal memo, such as the absence of the appellants' signatures on the memo of appeal and verification, cannot justify dismissal without first allowing rectification. Where the appeal papers were signed by authorised counsel under vakalatnama and no opportunity was given to cure the defect, rejection on that technical ground was unjustified. The appellate order was therefore set aside, and the matter was remanded for removal of the defect and fresh adjudication in accordance with law. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 19 Oct 2001 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51039