2015 (10) TMI 2290 - AT - Service Tax

Non-examination of evidence Facts by evidence not tested Approach of Appellate Authority is contrary to principle of jurisprudence as it did not determine the issue involved nor examined the assesse Unreasoned and non-speaking order passed Held That - Matter remanded back affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to Respondent.

Summary

Issues: Lack of examination of evidence by appellate authority, Unreasoned order passed, Compliance with judicial guidelines

In this judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT CHENNAI, it was observed that the appellate authority had failed to examine any evidence or test the facts based on the law. The tribunal emphasized that such laxity in not evaluating evidence does not align with legal principles. Merely citing judgments without a thorough examination does not automatically favor the assessee, highlighting a deviation from jurisprudential norms.

The law mandates that the appellate authority must analyze the issue at hand, scrutinize the relevant evidence, assess the assessee's pleadings in light of the law and evidence, and then arrive at a reasoned conclusion. The tribunal pointed out that the authority's decision lacked this essential process, resulting in an unreasoned and non-speaking order. Reference was made to guidelines from the Apex Court emphasizing the importance of writing judicial orders in a coherent and structured manner to ensure clarity and readability for the reader.

Due to the deficiencies in the Commissioner (Appeals)'s order, the matter was remanded back to the authority to reevaluate the case in accordance with the law, providing the respondent with a fair opportunity to present their case. Consequently, the decision in the appeal led to the disposal of the stay application. The judgment underscored the significance of following procedural and substantive requirements in rendering judicial decisions to uphold the principles of natural justice and fairness.