https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=2929 The court dismissed the writ petition challenging summons issued under Section 14 of the Central Excise Act, 1944, finding it misconceived. It held that the mere issuance of summons does not imply vindictiveness without evidence of arbitrary exercise of power. The court emphasized the lack of material supporting the petitioners' claim of harassment by revenue authorities and dismissed the petition for lacking merit. The court directed that the petitioners would only be examined during office hours, with inconclusive statements/investigations to be recorded the following day, aligning with a previous order in a related case. en-us Fri, 11 Nov 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 16 Apr 2008 11:30:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=2929 The court dismissed the writ petition challenging summons issued under Section 14 of the Central Excise Act, 1944, finding it misconceived. It held that the mere issuance of summons does not imply vindictiveness without evidence of arbitrary exercise of power. The court emphasized the lack of material supporting the petitioners' claim of harassment by revenue authorities and dismissed the petition for lacking merit. The court directed that the petitioners would only be examined during office hours, with inconclusive statements/investigations to be recorded the following day, aligning with a previous order in a related case. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 11 Nov 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=2929