TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2007 (3) TMI 432
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ena, DR, for the Appellant. S/Shri Bipin Garg, Advocate with Atul Gupta, C.S., K.K. Anand, Advocate and R. Pal Singh, Consultant, for the Respondent. [Order]. - In these appeals, all the respondents raised a common preliminary objections and therefore these appeals are taken up for hearing together for disposal. 2. Mr. Bipin Garg, learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....arned Advocate on behalf of the respondent No. 4 and 5 adopted the same argument. He further submits that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Hotel & Restaurant Association v. Star India Pvt. Ltd., reported in 2007 (5) S.T.R. 161 (S.C.), at paragraph 52 observed that it is settled that when a power is required to be exercised in a particular manner, the same has to be exercised in that manner....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t Tribunal in the case of CCE. New Delhi v. Kay Iron Works (P) Ltd., reported in 1998 (99) E.L.T. 462 (Tribunal), held that appeal filed by the Collector himself instead of authorizing any subordinate officer is proper. 5. After hearing both the sides and on perusal of the records, the relevant portion of Section 35B(2) of Central Excise Act, 1944 is as under :- "Section 35B. Appe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of Shree Ganesh Dyeing & Printing Works (supra) held that appeal filed by the Commissioner himself under Section 35B(2) of Central Excise Act, 1944 is not legal and proper and grounds of appeal do not tantamount to formation of such opinion. The other Division Bench of the tribunal in the case of Kay Iron Works (P) ltd., (supra) held that appeal filed by the Commissioner himself instead of authori....