https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=340087 The court set aside the impugned order and directed the respondents to call the petitioner for the next oral examination with proper written intimation. The court held that the circular intimation was invalid, emphasizing the need for individual intimation. It dismissed the argument of an alternate remedy, asserting its jurisdiction under Article 226. The writ petition was disposed of with no costs. en-us Thu, 15 Dec 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 23 Aug 2017 17:44:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=340087 The court set aside the impugned order and directed the respondents to call the petitioner for the next oral examination with proper written intimation. The court held that the circular intimation was invalid, emphasizing the need for individual intimation. It dismissed the argument of an alternate remedy, asserting its jurisdiction under Article 226. The writ petition was disposed of with no costs. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 15 Dec 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=340087