Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2016 (5) TMI 676

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as "the Tribunal") claiming the following substantial questions of law:- (i) Whether the Assessee is entitled to avail Cenvat Credit on the invoices issued by M/s Arihant Metal Corporation without actually receiving the goods? (ii) Whether the Assessee has contravened Rules 4 and 9 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 and is liable for penalty under Rule 15 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 read with Section 11AC of Central Excise Act, 1944? (iii) Whether M/s J.D. Auto had suppressed the material facts with the sole and wilful intent to avail inadmissible cenvat credit and have, thus, contravened the provisions of Central Excise Act, 1944 and .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... The Adjudicating Authority vide order dated 1.2.2012 (Annexure A-1) confirmed the said recovery of Cenvat Credit of Rs. 33,13,670/- along with interest from the respondent-assessee and also imposed penalty of equal amount. Penalties of Rs. 33,13,670/- was imposed on the Corporation under Rule 26(i) and (ii) of the 2002 Rules and Rs. 1,00,000/- was imposed on Shri Sidharth Baid, partner and authorized signatory of the Corporation. Feeling aggrieved by the order, Annexure A-1, the assessee filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals) who vide order dated 6.3.2013 (Annexure A-2) allowed the appeal and set aside the order of the Adjudicating Authority. The revenue assailed the order, Annexure A-2, in appeal before the Tr .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nistrative authority affecting the rights of parties, must speak. It must not be like the 'inscrutable face of a Sphinx'. 19 to 50 XX XX XX 51. Summarizing the above discussion, this Court holds: (a) In India the judicial trend has always been to record reasons, even in administrative decisions, if such decisions affect anyone prejudicially. (b) A quasi-judicial authority must record reasons in support of its conclusions. (c) Insistence on recording of reasons is meant to serve the wider principle of justice that justice must not only be done it must also appear to be done as well. (d) Recording of reasons also operates as a valid restraint on any possible arbitrary exercise of judicial and quasi-judicial or even administrativ .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... #39;rubber-stamp reasons' is not to be equated with a valid decision making process. (m) It cannot be doubted that transparency is the sine qua non of restraint on abuse of judicial powers. Transparency in decision making not only makes the judges and decision makers less prone to errors but also makes them subject to broader scrutiny. (See David Shapiro in Defence of Judicial Candor (1987) 100 Harward Law Review 731-737). (n) Since the requirement to record reasons emanates from the broad doctrine of fairness in decision making, the said requirement is now virtually a component of human rights and was considered part of Strasbourg Jurisprudence. See (1994) 19EHRR 553, at 562 para 29 and Anya vs. University of Oxford, 2001 EWCA Civ 40 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ey have altered the description of goods in the invoices issued by them showing the goods supplied by manufacturer/supplier showing the description of good as brass sheets. But revenue has failed to produce corroborative evidence to show that the respondent has not received the goods against the invoices issued by M/s AMC. In these circumstances, I do not find any infirmity in the impugned order, same is upheld. 8. Appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed. Cross objection is also disposed of in the above terms." 10. A perusal thereof shows that it does not satisfy the test of a reasoned and speaking order. Further, it was noticed that the case had been booked against the respondent on the ground that the Corporation had diverted the goods .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates