ORDER
K. Sankararaman, Member (T)
1. Smt. Anuranjan K. Singh, learned Advocate is present on behalf of the appellants. On the Bench pointing out at the outset that the appeal has been filed against an order-in-appeal passed by Collector of Central Excise (Appeals) relating to a question of rebate of excise duty for goods which have been exported out of India which type of cases stand outside the purview of the Tribunal in terms of Proviso (b) to sub-section (1) of Section 35B of Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944, she fairly concedes the position as pointed out. She, however, states that in the impugned order-in-appeal the covering firming part thereof had advised them to file an appeal to the Tribunal in Form EA. 3 and accordingly they filed the appeal in good faith as per the notes for guidance given along with the order-in-appeal.
2. Shri D.S. Mallick, learned Departmental Representative has no particular comments in the matter. As the legal position is clear which has been referred to above, the order-in-appeal should have been challenged by the appellants by way of Revision Application before the Government of India. It appears that they had actually in good faith, based on the instructions contained in the impugned order-in-appeal, filed the appeal. The mistake also escaped notice by the Registry of Tribunal at the time of initial scrutiny of the appeal at the time of its filing. Since, however, the Tribunal does not have any jurisdiction to decide this issue, I direct that the papers be returned to the appellants. The Commissioners of Central Excise (Appeals) may take steps to ensure that while disposing of such appeals before them, they use proper forms of order-in-appeal indicating the correct remedies open to the appellants so that the aggrieved persons do not pursue the matter before the wrong forum.