https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=237783 The court ruled that the Assistant Director lacked the standing to file the writ petition challenging the Settlement Commission's order. It found the applicant's disclosure before the Commission inadequate, emphasizing discrepancies in records. Additionally, the court deemed the case too complex for settlement and criticized the lack of connection established between seized cash and clandestine activities. The court invalidated the majority opinion of the Settlement Commission, upholding the dissenting view and directing the case for adjudication by the appropriate authority. The writ petition was granted with costs of Rs. 25,000 imposed. en-us Fri, 27 Sep 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 07 Feb 2014 10:14:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=237783 The court ruled that the Assistant Director lacked the standing to file the writ petition challenging the Settlement Commission's order. It found the applicant's disclosure before the Commission inadequate, emphasizing discrepancies in records. Additionally, the court deemed the case too complex for settlement and criticized the lack of connection established between seized cash and clandestine activities. The court invalidated the majority opinion of the Settlement Commission, upholding the dissenting view and directing the case for adjudication by the appropriate authority. The writ petition was granted with costs of Rs. 25,000 imposed. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 27 Sep 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=237783