2017 (10) TMI 747

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....or the Petitioner : Ms. Lakshmi Sriram for Mr.T.Saikrishnan For the Respondents : Mr. S. Rajasekar ORDER Heard Ms.Lakshmi Sriram, learned counsel assisting Mr.T.Sasikrishnan, learned counsel on record for the petitioner and Mr.S.Rajasekar, learned senior Central Government Standing Counsel for the respondents. 2. The petitioner has impugned the order passed by the first respondent, nam....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... why penalty under Rule 25 of Central Excise Rules, 2002 should not be imposed on the petitioner? 3. The petitioner had an opportunity to submit their objection to the show-cause notice. However, the petitioner chose to file an application before the first respondent for settlement of the case. The Settlement Commission took up the matter for consideration and found that the applicant, namely t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....filing the application for settlement before the first respondent. 5. Admittedly, the petitioner does not have a vested right to compel the first respondent Settlement Commission, to take on file the case for settlement without fulfilling the conditions prescribed under Section 32 E of the act. Record of the proceedings show that no return was filed and in such circumstances, an application for....