https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96335 Provisional assessment of central excise duty under Rule 9B could be exercised only by the proper officer authorised for that purpose, namely an officer not below the rank of Assistant Collector. A notification issued under Rule 2 had confined that power to an Assistant Collector, so an assessment made by a Superintendent was without jurisdiction. The jurisdictional objection was therefore upheld, the Collector (Appeals) order setting aside the assessment was sustained, and the Revenue's appeals failed. en-us Thu, 22 Mar 2001 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 21 Dec 2011 10:40:19 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96335 Provisional assessment of central excise duty under Rule 9B could be exercised only by the proper officer authorised for that purpose, namely an officer not below the rank of Assistant Collector. A notification issued under Rule 2 had confined that power to an Assistant Collector, so an assessment made by a Superintendent was without jurisdiction. The jurisdictional objection was therefore upheld, the Collector (Appeals) order setting aside the assessment was sustained, and the Revenue's appeals failed. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 22 Mar 2001 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=96335