Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the Collector (Appeals) was right in holding that the appeal against the Assistant Collector's order lay to the Tribunal and not before him, and whether the impugned orders were liable to be set aside with a remand for hearing the appeal on merits.
Analysis: The earlier order of the Collector had directed the Assistant Collector to determine the correct demand after considering the parties' submissions and to enforce recovery of short levy under Section 11A of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944. The Assistant Collector's fresh adjudication pursuant to that direction was thus appealable before the Collector (Appeals). The Collector (Appeals) committed an error in declining jurisdiction and directing the appellant to approach the Tribunal. The Tribunal's dismissal on limitation and the High Court's order following it could not stand once the appellate forum was wrongly indicated.
Conclusion: The Collector (Appeals) was wrongly treated as lacking jurisdiction, and the orders of the Collector (Appeals), the Tribunal, and the High Court were set aside. The matter was remanded to the Collector (Appeals) to hear the appeal against the Assistant Collector's order dated 20-3-1992 in accordance with law.