https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=347054 The court accepted the petitioner's case, setting aside the Settlement Commission's order rejecting their application for settlement of a demand. The court emphasized that the petitioner's disclosure of duty liability was adequate despite technical jurisdictional issues raised. The matter was remitted back to the Commission for reconsideration, highlighting the necessity for a fair evaluation of duty liability disclosure in accordance with the law. The decision underscores the importance of analyzing the specific circumstances of each case in determining the sufficiency of duty liability disclosure. en-us Wed, 02 Aug 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 01 Jan 2018 11:40:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=347054 The court accepted the petitioner's case, setting aside the Settlement Commission's order rejecting their application for settlement of a demand. The court emphasized that the petitioner's disclosure of duty liability was adequate despite technical jurisdictional issues raised. The matter was remitted back to the Commission for reconsideration, highlighting the necessity for a fair evaluation of duty liability disclosure in accordance with the law. The decision underscores the importance of analyzing the specific circumstances of each case in determining the sufficiency of duty liability disclosure. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 02 Aug 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=347054