https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=122310 The appellant sought interim stay of the Commissioner's order directing a special audit under Section 14A of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The Supreme Court granted the interim stay as the appellant was not informed about the audit direction and the order lacked specifics on the incorrect declaration or determination of value. The Court emphasized procedural fairness and the appellant's right to contest the need for a special audit, highlighting the importance of transparency and specificity in administrative orders impacting parties' rights. The appeal is scheduled for final hearing at a later date. en-us Fri, 20 Apr 2007 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 11 Aug 2012 12:42:15 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=122310 The appellant sought interim stay of the Commissioner's order directing a special audit under Section 14A of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The Supreme Court granted the interim stay as the appellant was not informed about the audit direction and the order lacked specifics on the incorrect declaration or determination of value. The Court emphasized procedural fairness and the appellant's right to contest the need for a special audit, highlighting the importance of transparency and specificity in administrative orders impacting parties' rights. The appeal is scheduled for final hearing at a later date. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 20 Apr 2007 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=122310