Jurisdictional defect must be decided first before remand in central excise adjudication proceedings.

The Bombay HC held that a jurisdictional objection to the original adjudication had to be decided before any remand for further proceedings. The appellate authority had found that the adjudication order lacked jurisdiction under Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944, and the Tribunal erred by restoring the matter without addressing that foundational issue. Because jurisdiction goes to the root of the dispute, the Tribunal could not direct fresh consideration or require condonation steps under Rule 96ZM without first determining whether the original authority had competence to pass the order. The Tribunal's order was set aside and the matter remitted for fresh disposal in accordance with law.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Tribunal was justified in restoring the matter for fresh consideration without dealing with the objection that the adjudication order was passed by an lacking jurisdiction under Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944.

Analysis: The appellate authority had held that the original adjudication was without jurisdiction because, at the relevant time, the proviso to Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 vested adjudicatory power in the Collector. The Tribunal, while directing the assessee to seek condonation of lapse under Rule 96ZM of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, did not address this jurisdictional finding. Since jurisdiction goes to the root of the dispute, the Tribunal could not restore the matter for further proceedings without first deciding whether the original authority had competence to pass the order.

Conclusion: The Tribunal's order was set aside and the matter was remitted to it for fresh disposal in accordance with law.

Final Conclusion: The jurisdictional objection required prior determination, and the matter could not be sent back for further steps without addressing that foundational issue.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the original adjudication is challenged as being without jurisdiction, the appellate forum must decide that issue first, because a jurisdictional defect goes to the root of the matter and cannot be bypassed by directing further proceedings on the merits.

---