Limits on appellate remand power under central excise law make a commissioner (appeals) remand order unsustainable.

The amended Section 35A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 removes the Commissioner (Appeals)' power to remand matters to the adjudicating authority. On that basis, the Tribunal held that a remand order passed after declining to decide the refund issue on merits was unsustainable. It also held that an earlier Tribunal order, not having been challenged, could not be disregarded in appellate proceedings. The matter was therefore sent back to the Commissioner (Appeals) to decide the appeal in accordance with the show-cause notice after giving both sides a reasonable opportunity of hearing.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Commissioner (Appeals) could remand the matter to the adjudicating authority and whether the impugned remand order was sustainable.

Analysis: The Commissioner (Appeals) had not decided the refund issue on merits but had instead remanded the matter for fresh consideration after disputing the earlier Tribunal order. The Tribunal held that the power of remand had been taken away by the amendment to Section 35A of the Central Excise Act, 1944, and that the cited Supreme Court decision supported the limitation on such remand power. The Tribunal further held that the earlier order had not been challenged and could not be disregarded by the Commissioner (Appeals) while exercising appellate jurisdiction.

Conclusion: The remand order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) was unsustainable. The matter was remanded to the Commissioner (Appeals) to decide the appeal in accordance with the show-cause notice after giving both sides a reasonable opportunity of hearing.

---