2015 (6) TMI 400 - AT - Central Excise

Disallowance of Trade Discount - Held that - Even though the issue of trade discount matter has traveled in past through different phases as above, ultimately that issue was resolved by Tribunal in the decision reported in 2007 (9) TMI 180 - CESTAT, CHENNAI relating to the present respondent. - It is not necessary to dilate the issue further except ordering that Revenue appeal is dismissed in view of reaching of trade discount issue to finality by Tribunal. Validity of order passed - Non speaking order - Held that - For the cryptic order passed by learned Commissioner (Appeals) in the present case and innumerable difficulties we faced to trace different past orders with the issues involved therein, before parting with this order, we may state that an order of an appellate authority to meet judicial scrutiny should be in clear terms, stating what is the matter in controversy before him, the points for his decision, the facts in issue, evidence tested, law applicable and reasons for the decision as well as his decision thereon. This is mandate of section 35(4) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and similar provision enacted in Customs Act, 1962. Any deviation to such process, makes an order cryptic, unreasoned and non-speaking. - Decision in the case of Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Surat Vs. Saheli Leasing & Industries Ltd. 2010 (5) TMI 9 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA - Decided against Revenue.

Summary

Issues:
1. Challenge to order passed by learned Commissioner (Appeals) regarding trade discount allowed by assessee.
2. Interpretation of trade discount and its eligibility for abatement.
3. Consideration of past orders and finality of decisions by Tribunal.
4. Requirement of clear and reasoned orders by appellate authorities.

Issue 1: Challenge to Order on Trade Discount:
The Revenue appealed against the order passed by the learned Commissioner (Appeals) regarding the trade discount allowed by the assessee to different parties at different rates. The Tribunal directed the Commissioner to give a finding on the disputed trade discount. The Revenue challenged this decision, leading to a series of appeals and decisions.

Issue 2: Interpretation of Trade Discount:
The Tribunal examined whether the trade discount given by the assessee was eligible for abatement. The Tribunal referred to various judicial authorities to establish that if the assessee charged the price less the declared discount, the entire discount would be eligible for abatement. The Tribunal analyzed previous cases to determine the eligibility of discounts based on the relationship between the parties involved in the transaction.

Issue 3: Finality of Tribunal Decisions:
The Tribunal emphasized that the issue of trade discount had been resolved in a previous decision reported in 2008, where the Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal against the order passed by the learned Commissioner (Appeals). The Tribunal held that the matter had reached finality, and therefore, the Revenue's appeal was dismissed.

Issue 4: Requirement of Clear and Reasoned Orders:
The Tribunal highlighted the importance of appellate authorities issuing clear and reasoned orders. It emphasized that orders should clearly outline the matter in controversy, points for decision, relevant facts, applicable law, and reasons for the decision. The Tribunal cited legal provisions mandating clear and reasoned orders and provided guidelines from the Honorable Supreme Court on the essential elements of a well-structured judgment or order.

In conclusion, the Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal on the trade discount issue, citing the finality of previous decisions and the need for clear and reasoned orders by appellate authorities. The judgment underscored the importance of following legal guidelines and providing well-structured decisions for judicial scrutiny.