https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=302871 The commentary explains that the Board of Revenue's supervisory power under the Act and the relevant notification extended to revising or directing compliance with the Excise Commissioner's action, even where no formal written order had been issued, because the statutory scheme placed the Commissioner under the Board's general control. It also states that the petitioner was entitled to payment at 42 paise per London Proof litre for supplies made during 1968-71, since the State had accepted the tender and the petitioner had supplied goods on the basis of governmental assurances and substantial compliance, despite the absence of a formal licence. The State could not rely on technical objections after benefiting from the continued supply. en-us Wed, 16 Oct 1974 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 22 Jun 2022 12:55:43 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=302871 The commentary explains that the Board of Revenue's supervisory power under the Act and the relevant notification extended to revising or directing compliance with the Excise Commissioner's action, even where no formal written order had been issued, because the statutory scheme placed the Commissioner under the Board's general control. It also states that the petitioner was entitled to payment at 42 paise per London Proof litre for supplies made during 1968-71, since the State had accepted the tender and the petitioner had supplied goods on the basis of governmental assurances and substantial compliance, despite the absence of a formal licence. The State could not rely on technical objections after benefiting from the continued supply. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 16 Oct 1974 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=302871