Jurisdiction cannot extend beyond the show cause notice: eligibility of capital goods could not be examined when only non-declaration was alleged.

An adjudicating authority cannot go beyond the allegations in a show cause notice: where the notice alleged only non-declaration of capital goods, and the declarations were in fact found to have been filed, the authority had no jurisdiction to examine the substantive eligibility of those goods under Rule 57Q. The order was therefore modified to the extent it purported to decide a new issue outside the notice, with consequential relief to the assessee.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Assistant Commissioner could examine the eligibility of the capital goods covered by annexure B when the show cause notice alleged only non-declaration.

Analysis: The show cause notice confined the allegation regarding the goods in annexure B to absence of declaration. Once the authority accepted that declarations had been filed, it could not travel beyond the notice and embark upon a fresh inquiry into the substantive eligibility of those goods under Rule 57Q. An adjudication in excess of the allegations made in the notice is without jurisdiction and cannot be sustained.

Conclusion: The Assistant Commissioner was not entitled to examine the eligibility of the annexure B goods, and the order was modified to that extent with consequential relief to the assessee.

---