TMI Blog2002 (4) TMI 151X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l No. HKS(659)CE-2001, dated 6/13-8-2001 of the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), New Customs House, New Delhi. The subject of that appeal was letter C. No. GL-3/LAR/Hyd/22/2001/531, dated 21-3-2001 of the Superintendent of Central Excise, Dharuhera. That letter reads as under :- Sub : Audit of the unit from 10-1-2001 to 12-1-2001. "During the course of the audit of your unit for the period ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... been requested to pay the amount of Rs. 2,13,615/-. The said request letter issued by the Supdt. of Central Excise has pointed out that prima facie short levy of Rs. 2,13,615/- had arisen, since, the said issue was squarely covered by the judgment of Hon'ble Tribunal in the case of Escorts JCB Ltd. v. CCE reported in 2000 (89) ECR 93 (Tribunal). No appealable order has been passed/issued by the S ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sions on behalf of the appellant, learned SDR points out that since the Commissioner has already observed that the request letter is in the nature of an initiation taken for recovery of duty short paid which is not an appealable order, the present appeal is not maintainable. 5. We find that a similar case had come up before this Tribunal in the case of M/s. Shree Baidyanath Ayurved Bhawan Ltd. v ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rieved by the demand and is entitled to be heard in appeal. Admittedly, the demand of duty has been made by the Supdt. without following the procedure laid down in the relevant legal provision, i.e. Section 11A of the Central Excise Act. Such a demand cannot be allowed to stand. Therefore, following our previous order in the case of Shree Baidyanath Ayurved Bhawan Ltd., 2001 (129) E.L.T. 780 the d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
