ORDER
S.L. Peeran, Member (J)
1. The appellant is challenging the correctness of the Order-in-Appeal No. 174/2000-CE dated 30.10.2000. The appellants had sent two letters to Joint Commissioner requesting permission under Rule 173H(3) to receive duty paid goods into their factory for purpose of trading. The Joint Commissioner noted that in terms of the said rule no such permission can be granted.
2. The Ld. Commissioner has noted that Rule 173H(3) is an executive function and not a quasi-judicial function and directed the assessee to take up the matter again with the competent authority for appropriate orders in the matter. He has noted that no appeal lies before him against the communication issued by the Joint Commissioner.
3. The appellants have prayed for decision on merit.
4. We have heard Ld. JDR who pointed out that in terms of Rule 173H(3) the Commissioner of Customs has got power to grant permission to the assessee to retain other duty paid goods or parts thereof not specified in Sub-rule (2) to enter or be retained in, a factory or a warehouse. He submits that this provision is not applicable to the facts of the case and therefore the Commissioner was justified in rejecting the appeal as not maintainable.
5. On a careful consideration we are satisfied with the submission made by the Ld. DR that the Commissioner was justified in rejecting the appeal as not maintainable and directed the assessee to approach the competent authority for appropriate orders. There is no merit in this appeal and the same is rejected.