Back
CUSTOM EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MADRAS
MS. JYOTI BALASUNDARAM, J.
Jainsons Textile Processors -Appellant
Versus
Commissioner of Central Excise, Salem -Respondent
FINAL ORDER NO. 604 OF 2011 APPEAL NO. E/65 OF 2011
Decided On : 19-05-2011
M. Saravanan,Ms. Indira Sisupal
1. In this case, the assessees who are an independent textile processor, filed a claim for abatement of duty during closure period, which was sanctioned after inordinate delay. They applied for payment of interest before the Dy. Commissioner, who vide communication dated 13-1-2010, rejected their claim, on the ground that he was not authorized to consider/sanction claims filed under Rule 96ZQ of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. On 8-2-2010, the assessees filed claim for interest before the proper authority viz., Commissioner of Central Excise, Salem. Vide letter dated 18-2-2010, the assessees were informed by the Dy. Commissioner that the proper remedy was to file an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) against the communication dated 13-1-2010 of the Dy. Commissioner. Vide the impugned order the Commissioner (Appeals) dismissed the appeal, on the ground that the letter dated 18-2-2010 of the Dy. Commissioner is neither a decision nor an order passed under the Central Excise Act, 1944, hence this appeal before the Tribunal.
2. Heard both sides. Once the assessees were informed on 13-1-2010 that the Dy. Commissioner was not authorized to sanction/consider claims filed under Rule 96ZQ of the erstwhile Central Excise Rules, 1944, they adopted the correct course of action by filing claim before the proper authority viz., the Commissioner. The Commissioner should have disposed of their claim for interest on merits, instead of driving the assessees to file an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) against the communication dated 13-1-2010. Since, the claim of interest has not been decided on merits, I set aside the impugned order and remand the matter to the Commissioner for fresh decision on merits. He shall pass fresh orders after hearing the assessees in their defense.
3. The appeal is thus allowed by way of remand.
