https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775980 A criminal complaint under the Central Excise Act was not liable to be quashed merely because an earlier departmental adjudication order had been set aside on procedural grounds. The complaint was independently supported by search, investigation, and inquiry material showing prima facie allegations, so the factual basis for prosecution remained intact. Adjudication proceedings and criminal prosecution could proceed in parallel, and the material before the trial court was sufficient to justify summons. The plea that the complaint was groundless and that discharge should have been granted was rejected, and the refusal to discharge the appellants was upheld. en-us Thu, 24 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 04 Aug 2025 08:28:09 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775980 A criminal complaint under the Central Excise Act was not liable to be quashed merely because an earlier departmental adjudication order had been set aside on procedural grounds. The complaint was independently supported by search, investigation, and inquiry material showing prima facie allegations, so the factual basis for prosecution remained intact. Adjudication proceedings and criminal prosecution could proceed in parallel, and the material before the trial court was sufficient to justify summons. The plea that the complaint was groundless and that discharge should have been granted was rejected, and the refusal to discharge the appellants was upheld. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 24 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775980