https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40792 Seized documents, account records and signed statements were treated as corroborative evidence of combined working, common expenditure and joint operation, so the finding that the weaving units were a facade and functioned as one integrated unit for duty and penalty was upheld. In writ jurisdiction, that factual conclusion was not disturbed because no perversity, arbitrariness or non-application of mind was shown. The jurisdictional challenge also failed: the Officer on Special Duty was competent where the raid, seizure and detection occurred in Bombay and the matter was specifically assigned to him. Limitation under the excise rules did not apply because the short-levy resulted from suppression of material facts, and Section 40(2) was read narrowly so that "other legal proceeding" did not cover departmental adjudication. en-us Fri, 14 Dec 1979 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 14 May 2010 17:36:19 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40792 Seized documents, account records and signed statements were treated as corroborative evidence of combined working, common expenditure and joint operation, so the finding that the weaving units were a facade and functioned as one integrated unit for duty and penalty was upheld. In writ jurisdiction, that factual conclusion was not disturbed because no perversity, arbitrariness or non-application of mind was shown. The jurisdictional challenge also failed: the Officer on Special Duty was competent where the raid, seizure and detection occurred in Bombay and the matter was specifically assigned to him. Limitation under the excise rules did not apply because the short-levy resulted from suppression of material facts, and Section 40(2) was read narrowly so that "other legal proceeding" did not cover departmental adjudication. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 14 Dec 1979 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40792