https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=180717 The settlement scheme under excise law was construed to permit a composite application by the company and connected directors or co-noticees, because the proceeding covers the entire show cause notice and related liabilities. The filing-of-returns condition under the first proviso to section 32E(1) was treated as satisfied where prescribed returns and declarations had been filed for the relevant business activity, without requiring month-wise or product-wise returns for every allegation. The third proviso to section 32E(1) was held to bar only pure tariff-classification disputes, and not disputes involving the deeming manufacture provision in Chapter Note 4 to Chapter 33. The application was therefore admissible and could proceed before the Settlement Commission. en-us Tue, 10 Oct 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 31 Mar 2016 18:30:31 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=180717 The settlement scheme under excise law was construed to permit a composite application by the company and connected directors or co-noticees, because the proceeding covers the entire show cause notice and related liabilities. The filing-of-returns condition under the first proviso to section 32E(1) was treated as satisfied where prescribed returns and declarations had been filed for the relevant business activity, without requiring month-wise or product-wise returns for every allegation. The third proviso to section 32E(1) was held to bar only pure tariff-classification disputes, and not disputes involving the deeming manufacture provision in Chapter Note 4 to Chapter 33. The application was therefore admissible and could proceed before the Settlement Commission. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 10 Oct 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=180717