https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=463367 Writ petition challenged apprehended enforcement of surety bonds under a refund-related notification regime while applications for special rates remained pending. The Gauhati HC considered it appropriate to issue notice, call for departmental instructions, and preserve the petitioner's position by granting interim protection against enforcement of the surety bonds until the next returnable date. The Court also clarified that pendency of the writ petition would not prevent the authorities from deciding the pending applications for special rates. en-us Tue, 20 Oct 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 28 Aug 2025 20:47:59 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=463367 Writ petition challenged apprehended enforcement of surety bonds under a refund-related notification regime while applications for special rates remained pending. The Gauhati HC considered it appropriate to issue notice, call for departmental instructions, and preserve the petitioner's position by granting interim protection against enforcement of the surety bonds until the next returnable date. The Court also clarified that pendency of the writ petition would not prevent the authorities from deciding the pending applications for special rates. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 20 Oct 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=463367