Full Judgment
1. When the matter had come tip on last occasion in view of the preliminary objection raised by the respondents that authorisation is defective, D.R. was directed to place relevant note sheet order on our record to verify whether the Collector had applied his mind before giving authorisation as envisaged under Section 35B (2) of the CESA.Relevant Section 35B(2) reads as under : "The Collector of Central Excise may, if he is of opinion, that an order passed by- (a) the Appellate Collector of Central Excise under Section 35, as it stood immediately before the appointed day, or (b) the Collector (Appeals) under Section 35-A, is not legal or proper, direct any Central Excise officer authorised by him in this behalf (hereinafter in this Chapter referred to as the authorised officer) to appeal on his behalf to the Appellate Tribunal or, as the case may be the Customs and Excise Revenues Appellate Tribunal established under Section 3 of the Customs and Excise Revenues Appellate Tribunal Act, 1986, against such order." 2. On going through the provisions of Section 35 B(2), it is clear that the Collector should make up his mind whether order passed by the authorities below is legal or otherwise before authorising the proper officer to file an appeal before C.E.G.A.T.3. In the instant case authorisation was issued by the Additional Collector. Section 35B (2) specifies Collector and not the Additional Collector. Furthermore, even the Additional Collector has not applied his mind before giving authorisation. Note sheet reveals that draft order placed before him was simply signed by him without making his mind whether adjudication order passed by the authorities below, is legal or not. In view of the infirmity, the appeal is dismissed.
Ordered accordingly.