https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45783 The High Court of Andhra Pradesh, in a judgment by Justice Gopal Rao Ekbote, ruled on the interpretation of Section 11 of the Central Excise and Salt Act, 1944. The court held that the Central Government is not obligated to attempt deduction or attachment of goods before issuing a recovery certificate, as the use of "may" in the section indicates discretionary actions. The petitioner's argument was dismissed, and the writ petition was unsuccessful, leading to costs imposed on the petitioner, including an advocate's fee of Rs. 100 to be paid to the respondent. en-us Thu, 01 Aug 1968 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 13 Jul 2010 17:37:40 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45783 The High Court of Andhra Pradesh, in a judgment by Justice Gopal Rao Ekbote, ruled on the interpretation of Section 11 of the Central Excise and Salt Act, 1944. The court held that the Central Government is not obligated to attempt deduction or attachment of goods before issuing a recovery certificate, as the use of "may" in the section indicates discretionary actions. The petitioner's argument was dismissed, and the writ petition was unsuccessful, leading to costs imposed on the petitioner, including an advocate's fee of Rs. 100 to be paid to the respondent. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 01 Aug 1968 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45783