<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2001 (8) TMI 447 - SETTLEMENT COMMISSION, CUSTOMS &amp; CENTRAL EXCISE, M</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97256</link>
    <description>Settlement under the Central Excise Act requires a full and true disclosure of the entire undisclosed duty liability, including the manner of its derivation and the amount accepted as payable. Where the show cause notice alleged suppression, wilful misstatement and related evasion for the whole demand, a partial admission tied to a different period did not amount to candid disclosure of the full liability. The Commission held that this defect went to jurisdiction, because full and true disclosure is a condition precedent to the matter proceeding under the settlement provisions. The application was therefore rejected as not maintainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 31 Aug 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 16 Jan 2012 11:06:16 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=134314" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (8) TMI 447 - SETTLEMENT COMMISSION, CUSTOMS &amp; CENTRAL EXCISE, M</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97256</link>
      <description>Settlement under the Central Excise Act requires a full and true disclosure of the entire undisclosed duty liability, including the manner of its derivation and the amount accepted as payable. Where the show cause notice alleged suppression, wilful misstatement and related evasion for the whole demand, a partial admission tied to a different period did not amount to candid disclosure of the full liability. The Commission held that this defect went to jurisdiction, because full and true disclosure is a condition precedent to the matter proceeding under the settlement provisions. The application was therefore rejected as not maintainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 31 Aug 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97256</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>