Statutory notifications control excise adjudication powers, and administrative circulars cannot override them; remand ordered on merits.

Assistant Commissioners' adjudicatory power over duty demands above Rs. 50,000 was treated as governed by statutory notifications, not by Board circulars that were considered administrative in character. The Tribunal held that the circulars could not override the notifications issued under the excise law, which conferred powers for adjudication, confiscation and penalty according to the governing statutory provisions. Any excess in the exercise of jurisdiction was treated as an administrative irregularity rather than a fatal legal defect. The impugned orders were therefore set aside and the matters remanded to the appellate authority for fresh decision on merits after hearing the assessees.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Assistant Commissioner had jurisdiction to adjudicate duty demands exceeding Rs. 50,000, and whether the impugned orders were liable to be set aside and remanded for decision on merits.

Analysis: The Tribunal followed its earlier view that the Board's circulars limiting the adjudicatory powers of Assistant Commissioners were administrative in character and could not override the statutory notifications issued under the governing excise law. It distinguished the contrary decision relied upon by the assessee and held that the Notifications conferred powers as indicated by the statutory provisions governing adjudication, confiscation and penalty. On that basis, the excess, if any, in the exercise of jurisdiction was treated as an administrative irregularity and not a legal infirmity warranting final disposal against the assessee.

Conclusion: The impugned orders were set aside and the matters were remanded to the appellate authority for fresh decision on merits after hearing the assessees.

---