2013 (6) TMI 170 - AT - Service Tax

Infrastructure support service - explanation under Section 65(104c) - non-speaking order - Held that - while learned Authority passes the order of readjudication, he shall follow the guidelines of Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Jt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Surat vs. Saheli Leasing and Industries Ltd. 2010 (5) TMI 9 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA to meet the interest of justice. - Matter remanded back with directions.

Summary

Issues:
1. Failure of the Adjudicating Authority to properly examine the allegations in the show cause notice.
2. Lack of reasoning and evidence in the adjudication order.
3. Importance of analyzing each allegation with relevant evidence.
4. Guidelines for writing judgments and ensuring justice is served promptly.

Issue 1: Failure to Examine Allegations
The judgment highlights that the Adjudicating Authority did not adequately test the allegations in the show cause notice to establish the facts and circumstances leading to the demand. It was noted that the object of the contract was not examined thoroughly with evidence to determine if infrastructure services were provided. The inclusive definition of 'infrastructure support service' required detailed scrutiny from material facts to bring the appellant under the purview of the relevant provision, which was lacking in the impugned order.

Issue 2: Lack of Reasoning and Evidence
The judgment criticized the Adjudicating Authority for reaching an abrupt and unsupported conclusion without providing a detailed and reasoned order. It was emphasized that the adjudication process should not be a mere formality to confirm the demand without clear issues and reasons stated in the order. The importance of avoiding arbitrary decisions and ensuring that justice is not only done but also seen to be done was underscored.

Issue 3: Analysis of Allegations with Evidence
Due to the significant demand raised in the adjudication without proper reasoning, the matter was sent back to the Adjudicating Authority for a thorough analysis of each allegation in the show cause notice. The Authority was directed to consider the appellant's replies, test the allegations with relevant evidence, and present material facts in the order. The judgment referenced guidelines from a Supreme Court case to ensure that justice is served in the readjudication process.

Issue 4: Guidelines for Writing Judgments
The judgment provided detailed guidelines for writing judgments, emphasizing the importance of relevance, coherence, readability, and timeliness. It highlighted the need for judgments to be concise, focused on applicable law and facts, and free from unnecessary legal complexities. Additionally, it stressed the significance of pronouncing judgments promptly and avoiding delays to uphold the interests of litigants and society. The judgment also cautioned against including content that could cause public agitation or hurt individuals or communities.

In conclusion, the judgment called for a re-adjudication process to be conducted promptly, ensuring that all allegations are thoroughly examined with supporting evidence and in compliance with the guidelines provided for writing judgments.