https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=46307 Allegations of clandestine removal, incorrect statutory records and non-accountal of goods were treated as attracting the extended limitation under the proviso to Section 11A, so the limitation challenge failed. The objection that the chemist's report and production figures were not supplied also failed because the record showed those materials had been made available, and no proper application for further documents was shown. A complaint of denial of natural justice likewise failed, as repeated opportunities, prior notice and filed written submissions were held sufficient; personal hearing was not treated as indispensable in every case. The adjudication was therefore upheld and writ interference was refused. en-us Mon, 19 Aug 1996 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 17 Jul 2010 11:06:19 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=46307 Allegations of clandestine removal, incorrect statutory records and non-accountal of goods were treated as attracting the extended limitation under the proviso to Section 11A, so the limitation challenge failed. The objection that the chemist's report and production figures were not supplied also failed because the record showed those materials had been made available, and no proper application for further documents was shown. A complaint of denial of natural justice likewise failed, as repeated opportunities, prior notice and filed written submissions were held sufficient; personal hearing was not treated as indispensable in every case. The adjudication was therefore upheld and writ interference was refused. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 19 Aug 1996 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=46307