9911796707
TMI Blog1993 (9) TMI 211X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Kalyanam, Member (J)]. This appeal is directed against the order of the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), Madras dated 30-3-1990 under which he has dismissed the appellant s appeal on the ground that the appellant should have filed an appeal against the letter of the Superintendent of Central Excise (Tech.), Bangalore dated 18-5-1989 rejecting the appellant s claim to take Modvat credit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a letter dated 18-5-1989 purportedly exercising the power of the Assistant Collector gave his own interpretation on the connotation of the word immediately occurring in Rule 57H and denied the appellant Modvat Credit. Thereafter the appellant made a representation to the Superintendent and the Superintendent replied vide his letter dated 21-9-1989 stating that the issue cannot be re-opened agai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... only competent authority to allow and disallow Modvat credit. The Superintendent of Central Excise has no authority or jurisdiction. Therefore, the purported exercise of power by the Superintendent by his communication dated 18-5-1989 is void. Apart from that the wording of the letter dated 18-5-1989 would prima facie indicate that it is an order of the Superintendent on the direction of the Assis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ch a permission to the Assistant Collector and the Assistant Collector also gave a personal hearing to the appellant. However, the communication that emerged out of this exercise was that of the Superintendent dated 18-5-1989. Under this communication the Superintendent merely stated that he has been directed to inform the appellant that the Modvat credit could not be allowed as requested for. Ina ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
