https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=222054 The court clarified that the challenged circular guiding recovery proceedings should not automatically trigger recovery actions without considering pending stay applications. It emphasized the circular's persuasive nature, not as mandatory, and directed authorities to refrain from coercive recovery if delays are not due to assessees. The court instructed expeditious disposal of stay applications and suggested electronic monitoring for transparency. Recovery should align with statutory provisions balancing revenue and assessees' rights. The writ petitions were disposed of with these directions. en-us Tue, 02 Apr 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 10 Aug 2013 11:21:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=222054 The court clarified that the challenged circular guiding recovery proceedings should not automatically trigger recovery actions without considering pending stay applications. It emphasized the circular's persuasive nature, not as mandatory, and directed authorities to refrain from coercive recovery if delays are not due to assessees. The court instructed expeditious disposal of stay applications and suggested electronic monitoring for transparency. Recovery should align with statutory provisions balancing revenue and assessees' rights. The writ petitions were disposed of with these directions. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 02 Apr 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=222054