<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1989 (2) TMI 254 - CEGAT, MADRAS</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=74777</link>
    <description>An order disallowing wrongly availed MODVAT credit under Rule 57-1 is a quasi-judicial adjudication, not a mere administrative direction, and is appealable under the Act. An administratively superior officer cannot exercise appellate jurisdiction over the Superintendent&#039;s adjudication unless the statute expressly provides for it. The doctrine of merger applies only when a competent appellate authority has heard the matter, and it does not validate interference by a superior administrative officer. Accordingly, the superior officer&#039;s interference was without jurisdiction and non est, while the original credit-reversal order remained valid and operative.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 02 Feb 1989 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Jun 2011 18:33:32 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=113056" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1989 (2) TMI 254 - CEGAT, MADRAS</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=74777</link>
      <description>An order disallowing wrongly availed MODVAT credit under Rule 57-1 is a quasi-judicial adjudication, not a mere administrative direction, and is appealable under the Act. An administratively superior officer cannot exercise appellate jurisdiction over the Superintendent&#039;s adjudication unless the statute expressly provides for it. The doctrine of merger applies only when a competent appellate authority has heard the matter, and it does not validate interference by a superior administrative officer. Accordingly, the superior officer&#039;s interference was without jurisdiction and non est, while the original credit-reversal order remained valid and operative.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 02 Feb 1989 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=74777</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>