https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91653 The Assistant Commissioner's adjudicatory authority under section 33 of the Central Excise Act was held to arise from statutory notifications issued by the Central Government, and not to be limited by administrative circulars prescribing a monetary cap. Those circulars under Rule 233 were treated as supplemental guidance only, so non-observance of the circular-based restriction was an administrative irregularity rather than a jurisdictional defect. The orders were therefore not invalid on that ground, and the matter was remanded for consideration on merits. en-us Tue, 28 Jul 1998 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 19 Oct 2011 18:38:03 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91653 The Assistant Commissioner's adjudicatory authority under section 33 of the Central Excise Act was held to arise from statutory notifications issued by the Central Government, and not to be limited by administrative circulars prescribing a monetary cap. Those circulars under Rule 233 were treated as supplemental guidance only, so non-observance of the circular-based restriction was an administrative irregularity rather than a jurisdictional defect. The orders were therefore not invalid on that ground, and the matter was remanded for consideration on merits. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 28 Jul 1998 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=91653