https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=44218 Interference under Article 226 at the show-cause notice stage is ordinarily unwarranted because the notice only invites objections and the adjudicating authority must consider them in the first instance, leaving statutory appellate remedies available thereafter. A noticee may file objections and produce evidence, and the authority issuing the notice must decide all contentions on merits after granting a hearing. Questions whether the goods fell under Rule 57F(4) or Rule 57F(2), and whether the demand under Rule 9(2) read with Section 11A of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 was sustainable, were left to the competent authority. The notice was not quashed, but the appellant was permitted to file objections and obtain a merits-based adjudication. en-us Tue, 11 Jan 1994 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 23 Jun 2010 18:53:43 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=44218 Interference under Article 226 at the show-cause notice stage is ordinarily unwarranted because the notice only invites objections and the adjudicating authority must consider them in the first instance, leaving statutory appellate remedies available thereafter. A noticee may file objections and produce evidence, and the authority issuing the notice must decide all contentions on merits after granting a hearing. Questions whether the goods fell under Rule 57F(4) or Rule 57F(2), and whether the demand under Rule 9(2) read with Section 11A of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 was sustainable, were left to the competent authority. The notice was not quashed, but the appellant was permitted to file objections and obtain a merits-based adjudication. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 11 Jan 1994 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=44218