COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE, CALCUTTA versus BERGER PAINTS INDIA LTD.

Citation: [1990] 1 S.C.R. 1027 · Decided: 19-03-1990 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: SABYASACHI MUKHERJI · Disposal: Disposed off

Judgment (excerpt)

COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE, CALCUTTA 
v. 
BERGER PAINTS INDIA LTD. 
MARCH 19, 1990 
A 
[SABYASACHI MUKHARJI, CJ AND M.M. PUNCHHI, J.] 
B 
Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal (Proce-
dure) Rules, 1982: Rule 9(2)-Custom" Excise and Gold (Control) 
Appellate Tribunal-Appeal-Documents to accompany Memoran-
dum of Appeal-Appeal filed pursuant to general authority given by 
Collector and order passed by Collector (in office note-sheet) without 
referring to any specific officer-Whether appeal filed in compliance 
with Rules-Purpose of the Rule explained. 
Rule 9(2) of the Customs, Excise aud Gold (Control) Appellate 
Tribunal (Procedure) Rules, 1982 provides that an appeal filed under 
the direction of the Collector or the Administrator shall be accom-
panied by an attested copy of the order containing such direction. 
Pursuant to a general authority and an order of the Collector (on the 
file note-sheet) the appellant filed an appeal before the Customs, Excise 
and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal which dismissed it by holding 
that it was not in consonance with Rule (2). Hence this appeal by the 
Revenue. 
Setting aside the order of the Tribunal and disposing the appeal, 
this Court, 
c 
D 
E 
HELD: 1. Having regard to the purpose of the rules namely, to 
ensure that there was an application of mind to the points in respect of 
F 
which the question for filing an appeal arose and that the appeal was 
duly ·authorised by the Collector, and was filed by tbe person authorised 
by the Collector in order to ensure tbat frivolous and nnnecessary ap-
peals are not filed, it must be held that in the present eontext and in 
view of the terms of the rules and the purpose intended to be served, the 
appeal was competent and was duly filed in compliance with the proce-
G 
dure as enjoin~d by the rules. Tbe rules were to carry out the purposes 
of the Act. Therefore, the Tribunal was in error in dismissing the 
a~peal. [1030D-F, G] 
2. The matter is remanded to the Tribunal for consideration of 
the Appeal on merits. [1030H] 
H 
1027 
1028 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
I 1990) 1 s.t.R. 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal Nos. 
A 
4447-48 of 1988. 
From the Judgment and Order dated 10.11.1987 of the Customs 
Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi in Appeal 
No. E/Stay/No. 45/87-A & E/Appeal No. 188 of 1987-A. (Order No. 
B 681 & 682 of 1987-A. 
c 
Soli J. Sorabjee, Attorney General, Ms. Nisha Bagchi and Mrs. 
I.~
Sushma Suri for the Appellant. 
_ 
Debi Pal and P.K. Chakraborty for the Respondent. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
"4 
SABYASACHI MUKHARJI, CJ. This is an appeal under sec-( 
·
tion 35L(b) of the Central Excises & Salt Act, 1944 (hereinafter called\.--
'the Act'). The appeal by the appellant before the tribunal was dismis-
D sed on the ground that provisions of rule 9(2) of the Customs, Excise 
and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal (Procedure) Rules, 1982 had 
not been complied with. The documents which are to accompany the 
memorandum of appeal are prescribed by rule 9 of the said rules which 
provides as follows: 
E 
F 
G 
H 
"9( 1) Every memorandum of appeal shall be filed in 
quadruplicate and shall be accompanied by four copies (at 
least one of which shall be a certified copy) of the order 
appealed against and where such order is an order passed in 
appeal or revision, four copies (at least one of which shall 
be a certified copy) of the order appealed against and 
where such order is an order passed in appeal or revision, 
four copies (at least one of which shall be a certified copy) 
also of the order of the adjudicating authority. 
(2) In an appeal filed under the direction of the Collector 
or the Administrator, the memorandum of appeal shall also 
be accompanied by an attested copy of the order containing 
such direction." 
The tribunal was of the opinion that the purpose and the spirit of 
rule 9(2) aforesaid was to ensure that the appeal was authorised by the 
collector to be filed. Our attention was drawn to the authority in the 
instant case, which was annexed "to the further affidavit filed in these pro-
ceedings. The said authority dated 24th September, 1986 read as follows: 
C.C.E. v. BERGER PAINTS [MUKHARJI, l.] 
1029 
"I hereby authorise Assistant Collector (Tribunal & 
Review, Collectorate of Central Excise, Calcutta-II, 
Calcutta, to act on my behalf in the matter of filing appeal/ 
applications/cross-objections/statement of reference be-
fore the Cu

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.