https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=245221 Suspension of an excise licence pending enquiry was treated as an ancillary power available in public interest and not as punitive suspension or cancellation under Section 31, so prior notice or hearing was not required for that interim step. The challenge to suspension on the ground of absence of prior notice therefore failed. However, Rule 27(1) requires communication of sample drawal and preserves the licensee's right to seek second-sample analysis within time. As the record did not clearly establish such intimation, limited directions were issued to treat the suspension order as notice of sample drawal, receive any request for second-sample analysis, and complete the enquiry within 30 days. en-us Thu, 20 Feb 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 24 Mar 2014 14:11:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=245221 Suspension of an excise licence pending enquiry was treated as an ancillary power available in public interest and not as punitive suspension or cancellation under Section 31, so prior notice or hearing was not required for that interim step. The challenge to suspension on the ground of absence of prior notice therefore failed. However, Rule 27(1) requires communication of sample drawal and preserves the licensee's right to seek second-sample analysis within time. As the record did not clearly establish such intimation, limited directions were issued to treat the suspension order as notice of sample drawal, receive any request for second-sample analysis, and complete the enquiry within 30 days. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 20 Feb 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=245221