Jurisdiction over Modvat credit disallowance depends on the competent authority; an unauthorised order is void.

The Superintendent of Central Excise lacked jurisdiction to disallow Modvat credit under Rule 57G because the governing materials indicated that the competent authority was the Assistant Collector. An order affecting Modvat credit must be made by the officer vested with power under the applicable rules, and action taken by an unauthorised officer is void. The disallowance was therefore set aside as without authority, although the Department was left free to proceed lawfully before the competent authority within limitation.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Superintendent of Central Excise had authority to disallow Modvat credit under Rule 57G.

Analysis: The dispute turned on which authority was competent to act on the Modvat declaration. The order of disallowance had been passed by the Superintendent of Central Excise, whereas the departmental trade notices and the earlier view of the Tribunal indicated that the Assistant Collector was the proper authority. Since the impugned action was taken by an not vested with the requisite power, it lacked legal authority.

Conclusion: The Superintendent's order disallowing Modvat credit was without jurisdiction and void, and the assessee succeeded on this issue.

Final Conclusion: The impugned order was modified by setting aside the disallowance as void, while leaving the Department free to take lawful action through the competent authority within limitation.

Ratio Decidendi: An order affecting Modvat credit must be passed by the authority competent under the governing rules, and any disallowance made by an officer lacking such authority is void for want of jurisdiction.

---