2006 (9) TMI 185 - SC - Central Excise

Benefit of Notification No. 281/86 - goods manufactured in the workshop within a factory - Validity of Tribunal s order - Held that - The Tribunal has not recorded a clear finding that the production was not being carried out by the assessee in the workshop situated within the factory or that the goods were being used for repair or maintenance of the machinery installed therein. By cryptic and non-speaking order, the Tribunal has upheld the order passed by the Commissioner by applying the ratio of the decision of the Larger Bench in TISCO LTD. (2000 (4) TMI 55 - CEGAT, COURT NO. II, NEW DELHI) without recording a finding of fact that the production carried out by the appellant was not in the workshop situated within the factory or that the goods produced by it were not used for repair or maintenance of the machinery installed therein. It is not sufficient in a judgment to give conclusions alone but it is necessary to give reasons in support of the conclusions arrived at. The finding recorded by the Tribunal, being cryptic and non-speaking, is set aside and the case is remitted back to the Tribunal for a fresh decision by a speaking order - Decided in favour of assessee.

Summary

Issues:
1. Entitlement to exemption under Notification No. 217/86-C.E.
2. Availability of benefit under Notification No. 281/86 to goods manufactured in a workshop within a factory.

Entitlement to Exemption under Notification No. 217/86-C.E.:
The Tribunal remanded the matter back to the Commissioner for a fresh decision based on a concession made by the parties' counsel and considering the decision of the Larger Bench in Commissioner, Central Excise, Indore v. Surya Roshni Ltd. The Tribunal's finding on this issue was not challenged and became final.

Availability of Benefit under Notification No. 281/86 to Goods Manufactured in a Workshop within a Factory:
The Tribunal held that the benefit of the notification was not available to the assessee based on the decision of the Larger Bench in the case of TISCO Ltd. v. CCE, Madras. The Tribunal concluded against the appellant-assessee without a clear finding that production was not carried out in the workshop within the factory or that the goods were not used for repair or maintenance of machinery. The Tribunal's order was criticized for being cryptic and non-speaking, lacking reasons to support its conclusions. Consequently, the case was remitted back to the Tribunal for a fresh decision with a speaking order after providing both parties with a fair opportunity.

In conclusion, the Appeals were allowed with no costs, highlighting the importance of providing detailed reasons in judgments and ensuring decisions are supported by clear findings of fact.