2004 (9) TMI 119

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ned Counsel Shri Dave for the petitioner. By way of this petition, the petitioner has challenged the impugned order passed by the Settlement Commission at Annexure 'F' on 7-4-2003 in Settlement Application No. 50 of 2000. 2.Having heard the learned Counsel Shri Dave for the petitioner and having carefully gone through the impugned order Annexure 'F' passed by the Settlement Commission, it appea....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s from the date of receipt of this order and they shall produce proof thereof." 3.From the impugned order at Annexure 'F,' it is clear that the Settlement Commission granted immunity to the petitioner from payment of interest under the Central Excise Act, 1944 so as the prosecution. 4.The aforesaid impugned order was duly complied with by the petitioner by depositing the balance amount of Rs....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....m bare reading of Section 32F(7) of the Act that the order passed by the Settlement Commission under this Section is final and it cannot be challenged on any other ground except on the ground of fraud or on the ground of jurisdictional error. It was tried to be submitted by Mr. Dave for the petitioner that while passing the impugned order, the Settlement Commission committed jurisdictional error a....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....at they were depositing the amount under protest. 6.Even assuming for the sake of argument that the Settlement Commission committed error on law while settling the application in exercise of its powers under Section 32F(7), then also this petition being petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, this Court would not like to exercise its powers when no jurisdictional error committe....