https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=72109 A Superintendent's duty-demand communication was held to be administrative, not an appealable quasi-judicial order, because it was issued without a show cause notice, opportunity to object, or a reasoned decision as required by Rule 10 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. The lower appellate authority's interference with the refund sanction was also found unsustainable because it decided the matter without notice to the parties and without examining the Department's alternative objection on the validity of protest. The matter was remanded for fresh disposal after hearing both sides. en-us Fri, 30 Aug 1985 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 12 May 2011 10:41:58 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=72109 A Superintendent's duty-demand communication was held to be administrative, not an appealable quasi-judicial order, because it was issued without a show cause notice, opportunity to object, or a reasoned decision as required by Rule 10 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. The lower appellate authority's interference with the refund sanction was also found unsustainable because it decided the matter without notice to the parties and without examining the Department's alternative objection on the validity of protest. The matter was remanded for fresh disposal after hearing both sides. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 30 Aug 1985 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=72109