Just a moment...

Report
ReportReport
Welcome to TaxTMI

We're migrating from taxmanagementindia.com to taxtmi.com and wish to make this transition convenient for you. We welcome your feedback and suggestions. Please report any errors you encounter so we can address them promptly.

Bars
Logo TaxTMI
>
×

By creating an account you can:

Report an Error
Type of Error :
Please tell us about the error :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home /

1998 (3) TMI 418

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ls, accompanied by 26 stay petitions. As the issue is within a short compass, it was decided with the consent of both the parties to hear the Appeals themselves. 3. Shri P.K. Jain, the ld. SDR, appeared for the Applicants (Revenue) and Shri G. Ambwani, the ld. Advocate for the Respondent Companies. 4. The dispute arose as the Central Board of Excise and Customs have been issuing instructions from time to time fixing the powers of various adjudicating authorities. The ld. Commissioner (Appeals) in the impugned order held that in all these cases, duty amount in dispute exceeds Rs. 50,000/- and that they were well beyond the adjudicating powers of Asstt. Commissioner. Accordingly, the ld. Commissioner (Appeals) set aside the orders....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....as been issuing circulars from time to time setting out the powers of adjudication of Addl. Commissioner/Dy. Commissioner and Asstt. Commissioner. 9. During the course of arguments, two Circulars issued by Central Board of Excise and Customs. viz. Circular No. 3/92-CX. 6, dated 14-5-1992 and No. 299/15/97-CX, dated 29-2-1997 were brought to our notice. In these Circulars, the CBEC prescribed certain limits for Commissioners, Addl. Commissioners, Dy. Commissioners and Asstt. Commissioners. 10. We also note that the Ministry of Finance (Deptt. of Revenue) by Notification No. 8-C. Ex., dated 2nd September, 1944 and subsequently by Notification No. 93/59, dated 28th November, 1959, in exercise of the powers under Proviso of Section ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....different. Thus in the Circulars under reference before us and the Notifications issued have a clear difference. The Circulars are administrative instructions whereas the Notifications are a part of the Statute. 13. We find that Circular No. 3/92-CX. 6, dated 14-5-1992 and Circular No. 299/15/97-CX, dated 27-2-1997 are administrative circulars and cannot take precedence over the Notification. We note that Notification No. 8-C. Ex., dated 2nd September, 1944 and Notification No. 93/59, dated 28th November 1959 are the Notifications issued in exercise of the powers conferred by Section 33. Thus, the Notifications cannot be compared with the Circulars. Under these Notifications, the powers of Assistant Collectors are those as indicated i....