ORDER
Jyoti Balasundaram
1. In this case, a duty demand of Rs. 3,27,242/- was confirmed against the appellants by inclusion of notional interest in the assessable value of special purpose machines manufactured and cleared by the appellants. In addition a penalty of amount equal to duty was imposed under the provisions of Rule 1730 of the central Excise Rules read with Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act. The assessees preferred an appeal against the order of the Additional Commissioner to the Commissioner (Appeals) who directed them to make a predeposit of Rs.3 lakhs. Their appeal was dismissed for non-compliance with the requirement of predeposit. In the appeal filed before the Tribunal predeposit of Rs.25,000/- was directed vide Stay Order No.266/2000A dated 6.11.2000. The appellants have complied with the stay order.
2. In view of the above and in view of the fact that the lower appellate authority has not passed an order on the merits of the case, we are of the view that this is a fit case for setting aside of the impugned order and remanding the case to the Commissioner(Appeals) for fresh decision on the merits of the issue. We direct accordingly. Needless to say, the Commissioner (Appeals) shall extend a reasonable opportunity to the assessees of being heard in person.
3. The appeal is thus allowed by remand.
(Dictated in open Court)