<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2015 (8) TMI 969 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=263052</link>
    <description>Summons issued under Section 14 of the Central Excise Act, 1944 for personal appearance and production of records were upheld where they were issued in connection with a search and aimed at securing evidence. The petitioner&#039;s claim that documents had already been furnished did not by itself establish illegality in requiring attendance. The alleged risk of detention on appearance was treated as speculative and unsupported. On that basis, the summons were found valid and the writ petition was dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 23 Jan 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 26 Aug 2015 10:11:30 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=394740" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (8) TMI 969 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=263052</link>
      <description>Summons issued under Section 14 of the Central Excise Act, 1944 for personal appearance and production of records were upheld where they were issued in connection with a search and aimed at securing evidence. The petitioner&#039;s claim that documents had already been furnished did not by itself establish illegality in requiring attendance. The alleged risk of detention on appearance was treated as speculative and unsupported. On that basis, the summons were found valid and the writ petition was dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 23 Jan 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=263052</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>