ORDER
R. Jayaraman, Member (T)
1. This is an appeal directed against the order of the Collector (Appeals) bearing No. V. 2(39 CETA) 373/87/669 (No. R-713/BD-157/87) dated 12-1-1988 rejecting the appellants’ appeal for non-compliance with the provisions of Section 35F of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944, without going into the merits of the appeal.
2. Shri Willington Christian, the learned advocate, arguing on behalf of the appellant, contended that for making the deposit of the disputed amount, there should have been a demand quantifying the amount, then only they can comply with the requirement. In the case, no such demand in pursuance of the order-in-original of the Assistant Collector dated 29-12-1986 has been issued quantifying the amount of duty. He also took us through the order-in-original where the amount of duty has been left blank. He, there-, fore, argued that the Collector without indicating as to the amount to be deposited ought not have rejected their appeal on this short ground without going into the merits. He, therefore, contended that the order of the Collector is bad in law and, is therefore re-quired to be set aside.
3. Shri C.P. Arya, the learned SDR, also agrees that there is no demand issued in pursuance of the Assistant Collector’s order dated 29-12-1986 quantifying the amount of duty involved.
4. After hearing both sides, we observe that in this case the prior deposit for entertaining the appeal on merits would arise only when the appellants are told as to how much they are required to deposit in terms of the order of the lower authority. Admittedly in this case no such quantification has been done by way of demand issued separately or indicated in the order itself. Hence the appellant cannot be expected to make his own calculations for making the deposit, which may or may not be acceptable to the department. Hence the Collector’s order rejecting the appeal for non-deposit of the duty amount is not sustainable. We, therefore, set aside the said order and remand the case to the Collector (Appeals) for considering their appeal on merits.