https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=33196 The Court upheld the Settlement Commission's orders, dismissing the petition challenging the interpretation of Section 32F of the Act regarding time limits for passing orders on settlement applications. The Commission's decision to reject a second application for non-compliance with statutory timelines was deemed valid, as it fell outside the specified deadlines. The petitioner's contention that the subsequent application was wrongly deemed filed earlier was rejected, emphasizing compliance with statutory deadlines. The Court found no legal infirmity in the Commission's actions and awarded no costs. en-us Mon, 23 Mar 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 06 Apr 2010 19:43:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=33196 The Court upheld the Settlement Commission's orders, dismissing the petition challenging the interpretation of Section 32F of the Act regarding time limits for passing orders on settlement applications. The Commission's decision to reject a second application for non-compliance with statutory timelines was deemed valid, as it fell outside the specified deadlines. The petitioner's contention that the subsequent application was wrongly deemed filed earlier was rejected, emphasizing compliance with statutory deadlines. The Court found no legal infirmity in the Commission's actions and awarded no costs. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 23 Mar 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=33196