2009 (8) TMI 461

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... een paid. Thus by making the application, there was no fresh discloser of the liability for duty. In the application which has been filed as Annexure A2 to the writ petition, we find that no such discloser of any fresh duty liability has been made. We may mention here that the Settlement Commission has to proceed on the basis of the fact stated in the application of the petitioner and not on the f .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... oner and Shri B.K.S. Raghuwansi, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the respondents. 3. Shri Mathur, learned counsel submitted that the Settlement Commission has misdirected itself and illegally rejected the petitioner's application. According to Shri Mathur in paragraph 7 of the writ petition an averment has been made that as the actual production of the petitioner's factory was much less than .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e Central Excise Officer having jurisdiction. 5. We find that the annual capacity of the furnace has been determined by the authorities. The liability of duty was admitted and in fact had been paid. Thus by making the application, there was no fresh discloser of the liability for duty. In the application which has been filed as Annexure A2 to the writ petition, we find that no such discloser of .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X