https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=48127 A writ petition challenging recovery of excise dues from property purchased in auction could not be dismissed solely on the ground that the purchaser had not filed the sale deed where ownership was not in dispute. The High Court had failed to decide the substantive issues concerning the reach of section 11 of the Central Excise Act, 1944, its proviso, and Rule 230 of the Central Excise Rules. The Supreme Court therefore set aside the dismissal, restored the writ petition for fresh disposal on merits, and granted protection against coercive recovery in the meantime. en-us Fri, 07 Dec 2007 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 18 Apr 2014 11:56:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=48127 A writ petition challenging recovery of excise dues from property purchased in auction could not be dismissed solely on the ground that the purchaser had not filed the sale deed where ownership was not in dispute. The High Court had failed to decide the substantive issues concerning the reach of section 11 of the Central Excise Act, 1944, its proviso, and Rule 230 of the Central Excise Rules. The Supreme Court therefore set aside the dismissal, restored the writ petition for fresh disposal on merits, and granted protection against coercive recovery in the meantime. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 07 Dec 2007 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=48127