https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=331400 The appeal was dismissed, upholding the decision of the learned Single Judge. The court affirmed that the penalty imposed on the appellants in the earlier proceedings was indeed for concealment of duty liability. Additionally, it was held that the rejection of the settlement application led to the abatement of settlement proceedings. Consequently, the appellants were entitled to pursue adjudication before the appropriate authority in response to the show cause notice dated 6th February 2014. The respondent was awarded costs of Rs. 10,200, and the court emphasized expeditious adjudication in accordance with the law and principles of natural justice. en-us Tue, 02 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 15 Nov 2016 10:11:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=331400 The appeal was dismissed, upholding the decision of the learned Single Judge. The court affirmed that the penalty imposed on the appellants in the earlier proceedings was indeed for concealment of duty liability. Additionally, it was held that the rejection of the settlement application led to the abatement of settlement proceedings. Consequently, the appellants were entitled to pursue adjudication before the appropriate authority in response to the show cause notice dated 6th February 2014. The respondent was awarded costs of Rs. 10,200, and the court emphasized expeditious adjudication in accordance with the law and principles of natural justice. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 02 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=331400