Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + HC Central Excise - 2018 (4) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (4) TMI 1030 - BOMBAY HIGH COURTMaintainability of application before Settlement Commission - Clandestine removal - parallel invoices - only contention of petitioner is that the Settlement Commission in this case completely bypassed the mandatory requirements stipulated in law and entertained the application - Principles of Natural Justice - Held that: - It is evident from the communication, copy of which is at Exhibit 'C' at page 80 dated 7th January, 2005 that this Commissionerate complies with section 32F(1). It is a report, which has to be forwarded to the Settlement Commission by the Principal Commissioner of Central Excise, where an application for settlement is allowed or deemed to have been allowed to be proceeded with under sub-section (1) of section 32F. The facts, as reflected from the records and to be found in the order of the Settlement Commission, therefore, do not permit the petitioner to raise any contention and of the nature that the impugned order contravenes the provisions of law or is in breach of the principles of natural justice - this argument is purely an afterthought. It is in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case that the Commission proceeded with and decided the matter. There was never any objection raised, much less serious for all this was done in the presence of the Revenue officials. The whole matter was allowed to be proceeded with and was brought to an end with the consent of the Revenue officials. Petition dismissed.
|