TaxTMI Login
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Just a moment...
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether a show cause notice invoking the proviso to Section 11A(1) of the Central Excises and Salt Act, issued by the Superintendent of Central Excise instead of the Collector, was legally valid.
Analysis: The proviso to Section 11A(1), as amended with effect from 27-12-1985, required that a notice seeking to invoke the longer period of limitation be issued by the Collector of Central Excise. The notice in question was issued by the Superintendent of Central Excise for a period covered by the extended limitation and therefore did not conform to the statutory requirement. On that legal defect, the notice and the proceedings founded on it were liable to be set aside.
Conclusion: The notice was invalid and the challenge succeeded in favour of the assessee.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
