https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47235 Under the amended Section 11A, notice in cases involving fraud, collusion, wilful misstatement or suppression of facts could be issued by a Central Excise Officer, and the statutory definition of that term was broad enough to include the Superintendent and Deputy Commissioner. Board circulars issued under Section 37B were only administrative directions for uniform work allocation and could not curtail jurisdiction expressly conferred by the Act. The Superintendent therefore had jurisdiction to issue the show cause notices, and the Deputy Commissioner had jurisdiction to adjudicate; the circulars did not invalidate either action. en-us Thu, 24 Feb 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 16 Jun 2014 17:01:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47235 Under the amended Section 11A, notice in cases involving fraud, collusion, wilful misstatement or suppression of facts could be issued by a Central Excise Officer, and the statutory definition of that term was broad enough to include the Superintendent and Deputy Commissioner. Board circulars issued under Section 37B were only administrative directions for uniform work allocation and could not curtail jurisdiction expressly conferred by the Act. The Superintendent therefore had jurisdiction to issue the show cause notices, and the Deputy Commissioner had jurisdiction to adjudicate; the circulars did not invalidate either action. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 24 Feb 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47235