Revisional power cannot override a final remand direction when the subordinate authority acts beyond jurisdiction.

The revisional power under Section 35A(2) of the Central Excises and Salt Act did not permit the Collector of Central Excise to interfere with an appellate order passed under Section 35 or to nullify a final remand direction indirectly. After remand, the assessment had to be re-examined in accordance with the appellate authority's binding instructions on classification based on the Chemical Examiner's report. Because the Collector acted beyond jurisdiction in revising the consequential order, the impugned revision was liable to be quashed, and the availability of an alternative statutory remedy did not bar writ relief where the action was without jurisdiction.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Collector of Central Excise could, in exercise of suo motu revisional power, set aside the assessment order passed after remand and thereby nullify the final appellate remand direction.

Analysis: The appellate authority had remanded the matter with directions to re-examine the classification on the basis of the Chemical Examiner's report. That remand order had attained finality. The revisional power under Section 35A(2) of the Central Excises and Salt Act extended only to orders of subordinate excise officers and did not authorise interference with an appellate order passed under Section 35. The Collector, by purporting to revise the consequential order passed after remand, could not indirectly defeat the binding appellate direction or ignore the hierarchy of authorities. The existence of an alternate statutory remedy did not bar writ interference where the impugned action was without jurisdiction.

Conclusion: The Collector had no jurisdiction to make the revision, and the impugned order was liable to be quashed.

---