Jurisdiction of excise officer in valuation disputes upheld despite contrary circular, with differential duty adjudication remaining valid.

Administrative circulars cannot curtail jurisdiction vested by the taxing statute in the proper excise officer to issue notice and adjudicate valuation disputes. In a job-work clearance matter where value was redetermined with reference to the principal manufacturer's sale price, the Assistant Commissioner remained competent to determine differential duty and penalty. The Commissioner (Appeals) erred in setting aside the adjudication order solely on lack of jurisdiction without examining the merits, because the statutory scheme empowered the officer to decide the valuation controversy.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Assistant Commissioner had jurisdiction to adjudicate the valuation dispute and demand differential duty, and whether the Commissioner (Appeals) was justified in setting aside the adjudication order solely on the ground of lack of jurisdiction.

Analysis: The dispute arose from duty liability in a job-work arrangement where the goods were cleared after re-determination of value on the basis of the principal manufacturer's sale price. The challenge before the appellate authority rested only on jurisdiction, without examination of the merits of valuation or penalty. The Board circular relied upon by the respondent could not curtail the statutory jurisdiction of Central Excise Officers. The statutory scheme recognised the competence of proper officers to issue notice and adjudicate such matters, and the precedent relied upon by the Revenue held that administrative instructions cannot take away jurisdiction vested by the Act. The valuation controversy, including consequential duty demand and penalty, therefore remained within the competence of the Assistant Commissioner.

Conclusion: The Assistant Commissioner had jurisdiction to decide the valuation issue and demand differential duty, and the Commissioner (Appeals) was not justified in setting aside the order on the ground of lack of jurisdiction.

Ratio Decidendi: Administrative circulars cannot curtail jurisdiction conferred by the taxing statute on the proper excise officer to issue notices and adjudicate valuation disputes.

---