TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (9) TMI 675
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed, had filed application dated 24th July, 2007 for settlement of disputes arising from show cause notice No. DRI-23/61/2006-DZU/1411, dated 23rd March, 2007 issued by the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, Delhi Zonal Unit. 3. The operative portion of the impugned rejection order passed by the Settlement Commission reads as under :- "7. The Bench has considered the records of the case, written explanation of the applicant sent in response to the Notice and the contentions made during the hearing. The Bench observes that as per First Proviso to Section 127 of the Act, deposit of the entire additional amount of Customs duty accepted by the applicant, along with interest due thereon is a condition precedent for making an applica....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tor of the afore stated company, relates to Customs duty demand of Rs. 1,41,372/- and Rs. 11,43,617/- plus interest and confiscation of the seized goods in addition to Customs duty demand of Rs. 3,80,007/-. Aforesaid show cause notice arises from investigation and search and seizure operations at the bonded warehouse of M/s. Continental Sales Emporium (Private) Limited. M/s. Continental Sales Emporium (Private) Limited, it is alleged, had illicitly diverted duty free foreign liquor meant for consumption of diplomats, etc. to third persons. During the search of the residential premises of the petitioner, imported foreign liquor of value of Rs. 2,94,000/- involving Customs duty of Rs. 1,41,372/- was seized. Imported liquor as reco....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....-. Failure to deposit interest of Rs. 18,635/-, it is apparent, was based upon legal advice and understanding of the experts consulted by the petitioner. Moreover, we find that the High Court while issuing notice on the writ petition vide order dated 13th November, 2007 had directed the petitioner to deposit Rs. 19,000/- with the Registrar General of this Court. The said deposit was made on 20th November, 2007. The writ petition has remained pending since then and was admitted to hearing vide order dated 4th August, 2009. 8. Counsel for the respondents, during the course of hearing, has accepted that adjudication proceedings are still pending and order-in-original has not been passed for last nearly nine years. 9. We would also ....