2005 (8) TMI 234

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

...., but the Assistant Commissioner instead of passing an appealable order only informed that the issue had already been decided and communicated to you vide letter in the Office of Assistant Commissioner Central Excise, Kolkata C Division, C. No. V(30) 109/Cal - C/99/3111 dated 9-12-99 and 21-11-2002. He submits that the letter dated 9-12-99 referred to just above was sent by the Superintendent informing the appellants that their request for availing Modvat credit on extra copy of invoice has been turned down by the Assistant Commissioner. He submits that the Assistant Commissioner has not passed any speaking or appealable order. It was simply an information as an advice which cannot be termed as an order. He relies on decision rendered in th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Commissioner (Appeals). In the present case, the decision was communicated to the appellants on 9-12-99. Therefore, the appeal could have been preferred within the period of three months from the decision taken by the Assistant Commissioner. In the present case, the appeal was not filed within time. Therefore, it has rightly been rejected by the Commissioner (Appeals). He, therefore, submits that the appeal may kindly be rejected. 4. I have carefully considered the submissions made from both sides. From perusal of the letter dated 9-12-99 written by the Superintendent of Central Excise and addressed to the appellants clearly reflects that it is not an order or a decision. He simply informed the appellants that the Modvat credit cannot b....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 2003, has informed to the appellants which is as under : "The issue was decided by the Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise, Calcutta-C Divn. and communicated to you vide his Office C. No. V(30)109/Cal.C/99/3111 dated 9-12-99. The issue was again taken up by the Asstt. Commissioner, Central Excise, Cal.-C Divn. and decision was communicated to you vide his Office C. No. V(30)88/Kol-C/2002/6477 dated 21-11-2002. In view of above, you are hereby informed that no order can be issued on the issue by this Office which has already been decided and communicated to you." As discussed above, the letter written by the Superintendent dated 9-12-99 is neither a decision nor an order. It does not come within the definition of decision or a....