TMI Blog2005 (4) TMI 68X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ly fall under Tariff Item 6807.90. Section 2(b) defines the "Central Excise Officer" and it is mentioned therein that any Officer of the Central Excise Department or any person who has been invested by the Board with any of the powers of the Central Excise Officer would be a Central Excise Officer. Thus, the Board has power to invest any Central Excise Officer or any other Officer with powers of Central Excise Officer. At the highest all that can be said is Central Excise Officers, as a matter of propriety, must follow the directions and only deal with the work which has been allotted to them by virtue of these Circulars. But if an Officer still issues a notice or adjudicates contrary to the Circulars it would not be a ground for holding ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... "68.07 Goods, in which more than 25% by weight of red mud, press mud or blast furnace slag or one or more of these materials, have been used; all other articles of stone, plaster, cement, asbestos, mica or of similar materials, not elsewhere specified or included. 6807.10 Goods, in which more than 25% by weight of red mud, press mud or blast furnace slag or one or more of these materials, have been used. Nil 6807.20 Blocks, slabs, concrete beams and stairs of a kind used in pre-fabricated buildings of Heading No. 94.06 Nil 6807.90 - Other 16%" 4. The Commissioner as well as the Tribunal have both ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ctor of Central Excise, New Delhi v. Frick India Ltd. reported in 2003 (4) SCC 634. It must be noted that both these judgments deal with a situation prior to 14-5-1992 when Section 11A was amended. Prior to 14-5-1992 in cases where there were allegations of fraud, collusion, willful misstatement or suppression of fact, the Act itself provided that it was the Collector of Central Excise who had to issue the notice. However, with effect from 14-5-1992 Section 11A has been amended. Under the amended Section any Central Excise Officer can issue a show-cause notice. This change has been taken note of by this Court in the case of Pahwa Chemicals Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Delhi reported in 2005 (181) E.L.T. 339. In this case aft ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er administration of levy and collection of duty and for purpose of classification of goods the Board may issue directions allocating certain types of works to certain Officers or classes of Officers. The Circulars relied upon are, therefore, nothing more than administrative directions allocating various types of works to various classes of Officers. These administrative directions cannot take away jurisdiction vested in a Central Excise Officer under the Act. At the highest all that can be said is Central Excise Officers, as a matter of propriety, must follow the directions and only deal with the work which has been allotted to them by virtue of these Circulars. But if an Officer still issues a notice or adjudicates contrary to the Circula ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g the duties of an Assistant Commissioner or Deputy Commissioner reduce the limits indicated in Clause (b) of this Section and may confer on any other officer the powers indicated in Clauses (a) or (b). In our view, Section 33 makes no difference to the position of law as enumerated in Pahwa Chemicals' case (supra). To the extent Section 33 permits the Board to reduce limits or confer power on other Officers the Board may do so. But this is in respect of adjudication. Significantly in respect of issuance of show-cause notices, no such power has been given to the Board. This itself indicates that where the Legislature so intended it specifically so provided. Thus where the Legislature has purposely omitted to so provide it clearly indicates ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
