https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=87064 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. en-us Wed, 30 Jul 1997 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 02 Sep 2011 15:22:54 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=87064 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. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 30 Jul 1997 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=87064