DHANALAKSHMI STEEL Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE.,

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE application for early hearing was considered and as the issue lies in short compass, it is allowed and appeal taken up for final hearing. It was pointed out that for the same period the duty demanded in respect of applicants' own case, at the time of hearing of Stay Application, the Tribunal disposed of the appeal itself vide Final Order Nos. 1798 -1800/2000, dt. 13 -12 -2000 the letter issued by the Superintendent, on behalf of the Commissioner cannot be treated as a final order in terms of Rule 4(1) of Induction Furnace Annual Capacity Determination Rules, 1997. Therefore, it is submitted that in this case also the Superintendent has issued the order and hence the proceedings is bad in law as held by the Tribunal in the case of Chamundi Steel Castings (India) Ltd. v. CCE, Chennai reported in 1999 (108) E.L.T. 578 (T). The appellants therefore seek for remand of the matter for passing a speaking order by the Commissioner who is the designated authority under law to pass such an order under Rule 3A(2) of the C.E. Rules.

(2.) HEARD Id. Consultant who prayed, for taking up the matter for final disposal in terms of Final Order Nos. 1798 -1800/2000, dt. 13 -12 -2000 in their own matter, which has been remanded back to the designated authority for de nova consideration as also became the impugned order has not been passed by the Commissioner but by the Superintendent which is not legal in terms of the cited judgment.

(3.) THE Id. DR opposed the prayer for remand of the case.