Pecuniary jurisdiction under Central Excise circular invalidated a duty demand adjudication beyond the Assistant Collector's limit.

The Tribunal reiterated that Circular No. 3/92-C.EX. bound adjudicating authorities and limited the Assistant Collector's jurisdiction to adjudicate duty demands under Section 11A to Rs. 50,000, except in matters concerning approval of classification and price lists. As the demand in issue exceeded that pecuniary limit, and the argument that the circular was confined to Modvat matters was not accepted, the impugned adjudication was held to be without jurisdiction and liable to be set aside.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Assistant Commissioner could validly adjudicate a duty demand under Section 11A when the Circular limited his pecuniary jurisdiction, and whether the impugned order was therefore without jurisdiction.

Analysis: The Tribunal applied its earlier view that Circular No. 3/92-C.EX. bound the adjudicating authorities and restricted the Assistant Collector's power to adjudicate duty demands under Section 11A to Rs. 50,000, save in matters relating to approval of classification list and price list. The demand in question was substantially above that limit, and the departmental representative did not meet the contention that the circular was confined to Modvat matters.

Conclusion: The impugned order was beyond jurisdiction and liable to be set aside.

---