https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=120382 A settlement application under the Central Excise Act was not maintainable because the statutory precondition in Section 32E was not met. The scheme requires prior filing of returns showing production, clearances and duty payment in the prescribed manner, and the applicant had not filed the required monthly returns. A declaration under Rule 173B, which only set out tariff particulars and duty rates, could not substitute for those returns, nor did it show that the unit was an SSI unit. The precedent relied on by the applicant was distinguished on facts, and the application was therefore liable to rejection under Section 32F(1). en-us Fri, 30 May 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 19 Jul 2012 10:18:37 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=120382 A settlement application under the Central Excise Act was not maintainable because the statutory precondition in Section 32E was not met. The scheme requires prior filing of returns showing production, clearances and duty payment in the prescribed manner, and the applicant had not filed the required monthly returns. A declaration under Rule 173B, which only set out tariff particulars and duty rates, could not substitute for those returns, nor did it show that the unit was an SSI unit. The precedent relied on by the applicant was distinguished on facts, and the application was therefore liable to rejection under Section 32F(1). Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 30 May 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=120382