https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=204698 Full and true disclosure is essential in settlement proceedings, and the factual finding of suppression can justify denial of complete immunity from penalty. The Madras High Court noted that the assessees had not disclosed material facts at the earliest opportunity and that the Settlement Commission found suppression of production, clandestine removal of goods, use of parallel invoices, and receipt of sale proceeds in cash. It also applied the principle that a party invoking the settlement mechanism cannot accept only favourable portions of the order while challenging the adverse part. On that basis, the court declined to interfere with the Commission's order and the challenge to the penalty failed. en-us Fri, 28 Jan 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 30 Mar 2017 14:55:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=204698 Full and true disclosure is essential in settlement proceedings, and the factual finding of suppression can justify denial of complete immunity from penalty. The Madras High Court noted that the assessees had not disclosed material facts at the earliest opportunity and that the Settlement Commission found suppression of production, clandestine removal of goods, use of parallel invoices, and receipt of sale proceeds in cash. It also applied the principle that a party invoking the settlement mechanism cannot accept only favourable portions of the order while challenging the adverse part. On that basis, the court declined to interfere with the Commission's order and the challenge to the penalty failed. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 28 Jan 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=204698