SHREE GANESH ROLLING MILLS (I) Vs. CCE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this appeal filed by M/s. Shree Ganesh Rolling Mills (I) Ltd., the Order -in -Appeal dated 16.2.1994 passed by the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), New Delhi is under challenge. The Collector of Central Excise (Appeals) had remanded the matter to the jurisdictional Asstt. Collector of Central Excise for de novo consideration after giving proper and reasonable opportunity to the appellants to put -forth their case and to pass an appealable speaking order. In this order -in -appeal, the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals) was disposing of the Review Appeal under Section 35E(4) of the Central Excises Act, 1944 filed by the Department.

(2.) SHRI D.N. Mehta, Advocate appearing for the appellants submitted that the appellate authority should have decided the matter finally himself and should not have remanded the matter to the Asstt. Collector of Central Excise. He referred that in a number of cases, Hon'ble Supreme Court had ruled that when the matter could be finally disposed of, the remanding of the same was an exercise in futility. It was also his submission that for the subsequent period, the Asstt. Collector of Central Excise (now the Asstt. Commissioner of Central Excise) had already finally decided the issue and he referred to the communication dated 18.11.1996 from the office of the Superintendent of Central Excise, Hissar, under which the provisional assessments have been finalised on the basis of the Asstt. Collector of Central Excise letter dated 7.11.1996. He referred to the Tribunal's decision in the case of Shri Krishna Pharmaceuticals v. Collector of Central Excise and submitted that the dispute in this regard had been settled by the Tribunal as per that order.

(3.) IN reply, Shri S.P. Rao, JDR submitted that the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals) had not passed any final order and after making some observations, he had only remanded the matter to the adjudicating authority with the directions that proper opportunity be given to the manufacturer and that a full speaking order be passed. It was his submission that as no clear findings had been given by the appellate authority, the order did not call for any interference and the matter had to be decided by the Asstt. Commissioner of Central Excise in the light of the directions given by the appellate authority.