2013 (10) TMI 137

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ssion made before that Commission would not be judicial admission – Held that:- It was just and proper for the Revenue to demonstrate as to how the admissions made before the Settlement Commission were erroneous and it was just and proper for the CESTAT to record a finding as to why the admissions made by the Revenue before the Settlement Commission were not binding on the Revenue - In the absence .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Central Excise Act, 1944 are not judicial proceedings and any admission made before that Commission would not be judicial admission? 2. In the present case by an order-in-original dated 19-12-1997 the duty demand amounting to Rs. 39 lakhs were confirmed and penalty was also imposed. Challenging the said order, the assessee filed appeal before the CESTAT. During pendency of the appeal before the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... sion of the Tribunal, the present appeal is filed. 4. Section 32P of the Central Excise Act, 1944 specifically states that the proceedings before the Settlement Commission shall be deemed to be judicial proceedings within the meaning of Sections 193 and 228 and for the purpose of Section 196 of the Indian Penal Code. Therefore, in relation to the proceedings before the CESTAT, the proceedings be .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X