Judgment:
1. Vide the impugned order The Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals) has remanded the matter to the Asst. Commissioner for fresh decision in the light of the Tribunal's judgment reported in 2000(117)ELT 345(T) in the case of Shree Kand Prasad v. CCE, Calcutta-I. Inasmuch as the matter has been remanded, we find that no stay application was required to be filed by the appellant under the provisions of section 35F of the Act. We dismiss the stay petition accordingly as not maintainable.
2. As regards the merits of the appeal we find that the Commissioner (Appeals) has first decided the issue of limitation against the appellant and as regards the merits he has remanded the matter to the Asst. Commissioner for deciding the appellants' plea of tobacco powder obtained by crushing of tobacco leaves as classifiable under heading 24.01 and attracting nil rate of duty, afresh. We agree with the ld.adv. appearing for the appellant that if the goods in question attract nil rate of duty, the question of limitation will not apply. It is only in case if the appellants are held liable to pay duty of excise, the limitation point will crop up. In these circumstances we make the remand as a open remand and the Asst. Commissioner would consider the point of limitation also in case the appellants are held liable to pay and duty. The appeal disposed of in above terms. At this stage Shri Biswas makes a prayer for directions to the original adjudicating authority to decide the remand proceedings within a limited time frame, inasmuch as the matter is almost 10 years old. In view of the above fact we expect the Deputy Commissioner to complete the de novo proceedings as early as possible.