2015 (10) TMI 1675

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... its that in both the cases the duty involved is more than ₹ 5 lakh and therefore, Assistant Commissioner is not a competent authority to decide on the remission of duty, if any. On a query from the Bench, both the parties agree that the letter dated 17.02.2014 is not maintainable and the impugned order is liable to be set-aside. - Decided in favour of assessee. - Appeal No. : E/12414-12415/ .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... on of expired finished goods in respect of two units. In reply to the said letters, the Assistant Commissioner, by letters dated 17.02.2014 requested the assessee to pay appropriate duty amount for destruction of expired finished goods. Both the units filed appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) against the communications both dated 17.02.2014 of the Assistant Commissioner, Central Excise and Cu .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... mmissioner of Central Excise Customs cannot be treated as an appealable order. He submits that in both the cases the duty involved is more than ₹ 5 lakh and therefore, Assistant Commissioner is not a competent authority to decide on the remission of duty, if any. On a query from the Bench, both the parties agree that the letter dated 17.02.2014 is not maintainable and the impugned order is .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X