https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42249 A tax demand notice marked by fundamental ambiguity as to the commodity sought to be assessed cannot be safely decided in writ jurisdiction when the record shows confusion between two distinct goods. The High Court noted that the excise authorities had mixed up stencil paper/coated paper with duplicating stencils, so the proper subject of levy was not clearly identified. Because classification depended on correct identification of the commodity and adjudication in accordance with law, the Court declined to decide the merits of the levy and directed the competent authority to clarify the commodity covered by the notice and dispose of the matter afresh. en-us Wed, 20 Apr 1988 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 10 Jun 2010 10:46:09 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42249 A tax demand notice marked by fundamental ambiguity as to the commodity sought to be assessed cannot be safely decided in writ jurisdiction when the record shows confusion between two distinct goods. The High Court noted that the excise authorities had mixed up stencil paper/coated paper with duplicating stencils, so the proper subject of levy was not clearly identified. Because classification depended on correct identification of the commodity and adjudication in accordance with law, the Court declined to decide the merits of the levy and directed the competent authority to clarify the commodity covered by the notice and dispose of the matter afresh. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 20 Apr 1988 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42249