Per G.A. Brahma Deva:

After hearing for some time with reference to the stay petition filed by the party, we find that the matter itself can be disposed of on limited issue. Accordingly, amount required to be deposited for the purpose of hearing the appeal is dispensed with. Matter was taken for regular hearing with the consent of both sides.

2. Arguing for the appellants Shri K.S. Ravi Shankar, learned Advocate submitted that the appellants being a 100% EOU, permission is required from the Development Commissionerto proceed with the matter. Since the same has not been done, the order is bad in law. In support of his contention he referred to a series of decisions including latest in the case of Kuntal Granites (P) Ltd. & Anr. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Belgaum reported in 2001 (43) RLT 829 (CEGAT-Ban.). In this case it was held that Commissioner to adjudicate show cause notice in respect of removal of goods without payment of duty by 100% EOU, only after referring the matter to Board of Approval/Development Commissioner or after considering the CBEC's order in this regard.

3. Since the matter has not been referred to the Development Commissioner prior to adjudication, i