Modvat credit jurisdiction turns on Rule 57H: only the Assistant Collector could decide, not the Superintendent.

Rule 57H vested the power to allow or disallow Modvat credit in the Assistant Collector, not the Superintendent of Central Excise. A communication issued by the Superintendent in purported exercise of that power had no legal efficacy, because no valid order signed and communicated by the competent authority had been passed. Such a communication could not be treated as an appealable order under the rule. The document therefore states that the Superintendent acted without jurisdiction, the communication was non est, and the matter had to be considered afresh by the competent authority in accordance with law.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Superintendent of Central Excise was competent to allow or disallow Modvat credit under Rule 57H and whether the communications issued by him could be treated as valid, appealable orders.

Analysis: Rule 57H vested the power to allow or disallow Modvat credit in the Assistant Collector. The Superintendent had no authority to decide the claim, and a communication issued by him in purported exercise of such authority did not create a valid legal consequence. Since no order under the signature of the Assistant Collector had been passed and communicated, the letter of the Superintendent could not be treated as a proper order under the rule or as an appealable order.

Conclusion: The Superintendent's communications were without jurisdiction and non est, and the assessee's appeal could not be rejected on that basis.

Final Conclusion: The impugned appellate order was set aside and the matter was sent back for consideration of the assessee's entitlement to Modvat credit by the competent authority in accordance with law.

---