Case Law Details
Viva Herba Pvt. Ltd Vs Union of India (Bombay High Court)
Bombay High Court held that there is limited scope of challenging the order of the settlement commission. Order of settlement commission cannot be challenged as if the order passed under an ordinary adversarial adjudication or as if the appellate power is being exercised.
Facts- The Petitioner, Viva Herba Pvt. Ltd., filed a settlement application before the Settlement Commission for settlement of the case under Section 32E of the Central Excise Act, 1994, admitting the duty liability as against the duty demand and seeking cum-duty price benefit. The Settlement Commission rejected the prayer of the Petitioner, and therefore, the Petitioner is before us, challenging the order of the Settlement Commission.
Conclusion- The Petitioner had to show that the price of the goods includes excise duty payable by it, and there is no question of exclusion of duty element from the price determination of the value. In the present case, since the Tribunal has opined that in the light of the transaction of the Petitioner, there is no evidence based on which it could be held that the price realized was inclusive of duty, and therefore, the benefit of cum duty could not be granted.
Considering the limited scope of challenge against the order of the Settlement Commission, the Petitioner had to show that the impugned order was in breach of a settled position of law which covered the facts of the Petitioner’s case. The order of the Settlement Commission cannot be assailed as if it is an order passed under an ordinary adversarial adjudication or as if the appellate power is being exercised.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
