TMI Blog2018 (11) TMI 904X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n to adjudicate case involving taxability, classification, valuation etc. The Commissioner (Appeals) has rightly set aside the Order in Original passed by the Superintendent dated 16.2.2017 holding that Superintendent has no jurisdiction to decide the matter. Though the appellant has put forward arguments on merits of the case also, I find that since the order passed by the Commissioner (Appea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iling the SSI exemption and was clearing the goods by paying central excise duty and also availing CENVAT credit on raw materials. A show cause notice was issued to the appellant proposing to deny the SSI exemption and also for demanding duty, interest and also for imposing penalty. The said matter was originally adjudicated by the Superintendent of Central Excise, who dropped the demand. Against ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sdiction. Since there was no appeal filed by the department on merits, the order in original dated 16.2.2017 passed by the Superintendent would apply and therefore the demand cannot sustain. It is also argued by him that the appellant having purchased the factory only 7.1.2015, the appellant has to be considered as an independent manufacturer and the value of clearances of the earlier manufacturer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . 5. On perusal of records, it is seen that the order in original dated 16.2.2017 was passed by the Superintendent of the concerned division. As per circular No. 1049/37/2016-CX dated 29.9.2016, the Superintendent is also given jurisdiction to adjudicate matters which are not exceeding ₹ 10 lakhs. It is specifically stated in para 2 clause (i) of the said circular that the Superintendent ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
