https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=172825 The Court declined to interfere under Article 136 with administrative findings where the record before the Assistant Collector contained no finding or suggestion that the transaction was a device to evade Excise duty. In the absence of any proximate finding of fraudulent intention or evasion, the extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 136 was not considered appropriate to upset the administrative determination. The Special Leave Petition was dismissed, and delay was condoned. en-us Wed, 03 Jan 1996 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 02 Sep 2015 10:50:21 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=172825 The Court declined to interfere under Article 136 with administrative findings where the record before the Assistant Collector contained no finding or suggestion that the transaction was a device to evade Excise duty. In the absence of any proximate finding of fraudulent intention or evasion, the extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 136 was not considered appropriate to upset the administrative determination. The Special Leave Petition was dismissed, and delay was condoned. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 03 Jan 1996 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=172825