https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=221467 In excise search matters, recorded reasons to believe and approval by the empowered officer were sufficient; the officer was not required to personally record those reasons if he applied his mind. Prior approval from the Director General, Central Excise Intelligence was not shown to be a statutory requirement. A search had to be specifically authorised for the premises concerned, and an omnibus order without unit-specific application of mind was invalid for the unapproved unit while remaining valid for the units actually covered. The dispute over whether the goods were exempt or dutiable raised factual questions and was left to the departmental authority, not decided in writ jurisdiction. en-us Wed, 27 Oct 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 13 Mar 2013 11:17:29 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=221467 In excise search matters, recorded reasons to believe and approval by the empowered officer were sufficient; the officer was not required to personally record those reasons if he applied his mind. Prior approval from the Director General, Central Excise Intelligence was not shown to be a statutory requirement. A search had to be specifically authorised for the premises concerned, and an omnibus order without unit-specific application of mind was invalid for the unapproved unit while remaining valid for the units actually covered. The dispute over whether the goods were exempt or dutiable raised factual questions and was left to the departmental authority, not decided in writ jurisdiction. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 27 Oct 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=221467