https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=44237 The appellant, a wholesale dealer in cigarettes, sought the right to have a legal practitioner present during interrogation by Senior Intelligence Officers. The court held that the appellant did not have the right to be accompanied by a lawyer during the inquiry under Section 14 of the Central Excises and Salt Act. Legal principles from relevant cases were considered, and the court clarified that the appellant must be present for examination only if a fresh summons is issued. The court also directed that examinations should be completed before sunset and resumed the next day if needed to address concerns about overnight detention during questioning. en-us Fri, 01 Dec 1995 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 25 Jun 2010 10:19:05 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=44237 The appellant, a wholesale dealer in cigarettes, sought the right to have a legal practitioner present during interrogation by Senior Intelligence Officers. The court held that the appellant did not have the right to be accompanied by a lawyer during the inquiry under Section 14 of the Central Excises and Salt Act. Legal principles from relevant cases were considered, and the court clarified that the appellant must be present for examination only if a fresh summons is issued. The court also directed that examinations should be completed before sunset and resumed the next day if needed to address concerns about overnight detention during questioning. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 01 Dec 1995 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=44237