Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether a settlement application under the Central Excise Act, 1944 is maintainable at the stage of de novo adjudication after remand by appellate fora; and whether the application deserved admission on the facts of the case.
Analysis: The statutory language permitting an assessee to make an application "at any stage of a case" was treated as wide enough to include proceedings pending before the adjudicating authority after remand. The fact that the original adjudication had been partly set aside and the matter was awaiting fresh decision did not bar recourse to settlement, because the dispute still remained alive and the assessee had admitted a substantial portion of the duty liability. The objection that the proceeding was no longer at the show cause notice stage was rejected, and the Commission held that the application satisfied the other requirements for consideration.
Conclusion: The settlement application was held maintainable and was admitted for further proceedings.
Final Conclusion: The dispute was permitted to proceed before the Settlement Commission, with the assessee required to pay the admitted duty and the Commission assuming exclusive jurisdiction over the case.
Ratio Decidendi: An assessee may invoke settlement jurisdiction at the de novo stage of a case after remand, because the expression "at any stage of a case" is broad enough to cover pending proceedings not finally concluded.