2004 (3) TMI 509 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
1. Challenge against the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) setting aside the order of the Asstt. Commissioner.
2. Quantification of the amount to be granted as deduction on account of receivable goods.
3. Validity of the order passed by the Asstt. Commissioner regarding deductions on interest on receivables.
4. The Commissioner (Appeals) setting aside the order of the Asstt. Commissioner as a non-speaking order.

Analysis:

1. The appeal was filed against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) setting aside the Asstt. Commissioner's order, which was based on a direction from the Tribunal in a previous case. The Tribunal had ruled that interest on receivables should be allowed as a deduction, regardless of whether it was collected separately. The Tribunal remanded the matter to the jurisdictional authority for granting the necessary relief after verifying the correct amount of deduction due on account of interest on receivables.

2. The Asstt. Commissioner quantified the amount to be granted as a deduction on account of receivable goods to be Rs. 75,06,854.23. The Asstt. Commissioner found the deduction claimed on account of interest on receivables to be justified and allowed the deductions, leading to a refund of Rs. 66,14,753/- to the party.

3. The Commissioner (Appeals) set aside the Asstt. Commissioner's order, citing it as a non-speaking order. However, the Tribunal found that the Asstt. Commissioner had correctly implemented the Tribunal's remand order, and there was no case presented by the Revenue challenging the calculation. The Commissioner (Appeals) overstepped by delving into the permissibility of deductions, which had already been decided by the Tribunal and accepted by the Revenue. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the Commissioner's order and allowed the appeal.

4. The Tribunal held that the Commissioner (Appeals) erred in setting aside the Asstt. Commissioner's order, as the Asstt. Commissioner had followed the Tribunal's remand order correctly. The Tribunal emphasized that the Commissioner did not have the authority to question the entitlement of the assessee to deductions on interest on receivables, especially when the issue had already been settled by the Tribunal and accepted by the Revenue. Hence, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order and allowed the appeal.