https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=216642 A complainant in an excise prosecution must be given a fair and reasonable opportunity to complete pre-charge evidence, especially where several witnesses and documents are listed. Closing that evidence after only two opportunities was treated as an improper exercise of jurisdiction, and the discharge based on that closure was not sustainable. Prior sanction was not required as a condition precedent to filing the complaint, because no statutory sanction requirement was shown; an internal departmental circular could not substitute for statutory authority. The complaint was restored to the trial court for completion of pre-charge evidence, with one further opportunity granted to the complainant. en-us Tue, 27 Sep 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Sun, 16 Sep 2012 09:07:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=216642 A complainant in an excise prosecution must be given a fair and reasonable opportunity to complete pre-charge evidence, especially where several witnesses and documents are listed. Closing that evidence after only two opportunities was treated as an improper exercise of jurisdiction, and the discharge based on that closure was not sustainable. Prior sanction was not required as a condition precedent to filing the complaint, because no statutory sanction requirement was shown; an internal departmental circular could not substitute for statutory authority. The complaint was restored to the trial court for completion of pre-charge evidence, with one further opportunity granted to the complainant. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 27 Sep 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=216642