https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52814 The Tribunal held that the appellant, a trading entity, lacked the necessary locus standi to challenge the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) under Section 35B of the Central Excise Act. The appellant, as a third party to the adjudication proceedings, did not demonstrate a direct legal interest in the goods under adjudication, as required by precedents like Northern Plastics. The appeal was dismissed based on the appellant's failure to meet the criteria for standing, in accordance with established case law principles and statutory provisions governing excise appellate remedies. en-us Wed, 25 Feb 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 08 Oct 2010 09:46:02 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52814 The Tribunal held that the appellant, a trading entity, lacked the necessary locus standi to challenge the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) under Section 35B of the Central Excise Act. The appellant, as a third party to the adjudication proceedings, did not demonstrate a direct legal interest in the goods under adjudication, as required by precedents like Northern Plastics. The appeal was dismissed based on the appellant's failure to meet the criteria for standing, in accordance with established case law principles and statutory provisions governing excise appellate remedies. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 25 Feb 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=52814