Appealable order under Rule 57G turns on whether a communication has operative decisional character, not mere information seeking.

Communications issued under Rule 57G of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 were analysed to determine whether they constituted appealable orders. The note states that the 9-12-1996 communication was not treated by either side as an appealable order and was followed by later show cause notices for the same items, while the 5-5-1998 letter was only a request for details and lacked the character of an order. On that basis, the Commissioner (Appeals) was said to have erred in rejecting the appeal as not maintainable, and the matter was remanded for decision on merits.

---

---

Issues: Whether the communications dated 9-12-1996 and 5-5-1998 were appealable orders and whether the appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) ought to have been decided on merits.

Analysis: The communications were examined in the context of Rule 57G of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, under which the assessee was required to file a declaration and obtain a dated acknowledgment. The record showed that the communication dated 9-12-1996 was not treated by either side as an appealable order and that separate show cause notices had been issued later in respect of the items covered by it. The letter dated 5-5-1998 was only a communication calling for details and did not have the character of an order, much less an appealable one.

Conclusion: The Commissioner (Appeals) erred in dismissing the appeal as not maintainable and ought to have considered it on merits. The impugned order was set aside and the matter was remanded for fresh consideration on merits.

---