Skip to content


S. Raman Vs. Collector of Central Excise - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtCustoms Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Tamil Nadu
Decided On
Reported in(1985)(22)ELT114Tri(Chennai)
AppellantS. Raman
RespondentCollector of Central Excise
Excerpt:
.....central excise (appeals), madras, who has returned the same after referring to the order of this bench passed in the case : s. raman of paramakudi v.collector of central excise, madurai, and published as 1984 ecr 1605.it has been stated that the matter be heard by the tribunal as the collector (appeals) has no jurisdiction. we note that the order in raman's case was not a final decision in the matter but was only in the form of a request to the president for the constitution of a larger bench to determine the matter in controversy relating to jurisdiction.2. the question, whether this tribunal has jurisdiction to hear appeals against the orders passed by the additional collector under the gold (control) act had come up before a larger bench consisting of three members in appeal no......
Judgment:
1. This appeal was sent by this Tribunal to the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Madras, who has returned the same after referring to the order of this Bench passed in the case : S. Raman of Paramakudi v.Collector of Central Excise, Madurai, and published as 1984 ECR 1605.

It has been stated that the matter be heard by the Tribunal as the Collector (Appeals) has no jurisdiction. We note that the order in Raman's case was not a final decision in the matter but was only in the form of a request to the President for the constitution of a Larger Bench to determine the matter in controversy relating to jurisdiction.

2. The question, whether this Tribunal has jurisdiction to hear appeals against the orders passed by the Additional Collector under the Gold (Control) Act had come up before a Larger Bench consisting of three Members in Appeal No. GC(DEL) 26/82-NRB {S.S. Agarwal, Kanpur v.Collector of Central Excise, Kanpur). The whole point was thoroughly gone into and it was finally held on 24-11-1983 that the Appellate Tribunal has no jurisdiction to take cognisance of such appeals, which arise from the orders passed by the Additional Collectors and that only the Collector (Appeals) has the jurisdiction. In view of this decision taken by a Larger Bench consisting of Sarvashri G. Sankaran, H.R. Syiem and S.C. Jain, the President had not found it necessary to constitute another Larger Bench for determining the same issue. In the circumstances, the case referred by the South Regional Bench had to be decided in terms of the decision in S.S. Agarwal's case. We observe that the order passed by the three Members Bench was not cited before the Regional Bench when the reference was made and that seems to be the reason for making the reference so that an authoritative decision is given to avoid conflicting orders.

3. As this Tribunal has already decided in the case of S.S. Agarwal v.Collector of Central Excise, Kanpur, that it has no jurisdiction to hear such appeals, this appeal is accordingly sent to the Collector (Appeals) for disposal in accordance with law. The Registry should forward the relevant record immediately.

4. We are informed that there are several other appeals pending in the South Regional Bench where a similar point regarding jurisdiction is involved, i.e. wherein the orders had been passed by the Additional Collector under the Gold (Control) Act. Those appeals be also sent to the Collector (Appeals) immediately. This will avoid inconvenience to the parties. A report that all such appeals have been sent to the Collector (Appeals) be submitted to the President after compliance by the Registry.

5. A copy of this order be also sent to the Chairman, Central Board of Excise & Customs, for information.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //