9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (12) TMI 230X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on in the nature of mandamus directing the Customs and Central Excise Settlement Commission to decide the application of the petitioners filed under Section 32E of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) on merits and to direct the respondents not to take cognizance of any proceeding initiated on the basis of the order dated 5th October, 2007 passed by the Settlement Commission on the application of the petitioners. 2. Briefly stated the facts giving rise to the present writ petition are as follows : According to the petitioner it is engaged in manufacture of paints and varnish falling under Chapter 32 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 and it is duly registered with the authorities concerned under the Act. B ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... means of Writ Petition No. 497 of 2006. A Division Bench of this Court vide judgment and order dated 12th April, 2006 had dismissed the writ petition on the ground that the Settlement Commission had at two places recorded the concession and agreement of the learned Senior Counsel that the case be sent back to the Adjudicating Officer. This Court gave an opportunity to the petitioner to file an affidavit of the learned Senior Counsel stating that no such concession was given but for the reasons best known to it no affidavit was filed whereupon this Court declined to disbelieve the Chairman and two members of the Settlement Commission on the bald averment of the petitioner. However, it had left it open to the petitioner to approach the Settl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e find from paragraph 11 of the order that the Commission after hearing both the parties, i.e. the petitioner and the Revenue's representative, wanted to know from the petitioner's counsel as to whether the duty liability as per SCN after abating it towards treatment of the sale-price as cum-duty-price, would be acceptable to them, to which, the learned Senior Counsel replied in the negative. However, he agreed for returning the case to the adjudicating authority in view of intricacies involved requiring an exhaustive examination of each issue with the related evidence. Further in paragraph 13 of the aforesaid order the Commission has come to the conclusion that as the case requires exhaustive enquiry, the learned Senior Counsel also agreed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
