Rule 57-I authority over wrongly taken Modvat credit held to rest with the Assistant Collector despite monetary-limit instructions.

Rule 57-I governed disallowance of wrongly taken Modvat credit and recovery of the amount utilised, and the Assistant Collector was treated as the proper officer to act under that rule. The Tribunal held that, where Rule 57-I alone was invoked, the Board's monetary-limit instructions under Section 11A did not control the exercise of power. Because no issue of penalty arose, the matter remained within the scope of Rule 57-I. The contrary view that the Assistant Collector lacked competence was therefore rejected.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Assistant Collector was competent, as the proper officer under Rule 57-I, to disallow wrongly taken Modvat credit and recover the amount utilised, notwithstanding the monetary-limit instructions relied upon by the Collector (Appeals).

Analysis: Rule 57-I specifically governed disallowance of Modvat credit and recovery of the amount utilised. The Tribunal treated the Assistant Collector as the proper officer for the purpose of that rule and held that, where Rule 57-I alone was invoked, the Board's monetary-limit instructions under Section 11A did not govern the exercise of power. The absence of any question of penalty also kept the matter within the scope of Rule 57-I.

Conclusion: The Assistant Collector was competent to adjudicate the matter under Rule 57-I, and the contrary view was unsustainable.

---