9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (5) TMI 676X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f goods in the invoices issued by them showing the goods supplied by the manufacturer/ supplier. It was only recorded that the revenue had failed to produce corroborative evidence to prove that the respondent had not received the goods against the invoices issued by the Corporation. The Tribunal being a final fact finding authority was required to deal with all aspects of facts and law and then record its conclusions based thereon. No legally justified reasons have been recorded by the Tribunal for dismissing the appeal of the revenue. Therefore, since the tribunal's order does not qualify being a reasoned speaking order as enunciated by the Apex Court in M/s Kranti Associates Pvt. Ltd. and another v. Sh. Masood Ahmed Khan and other [2010 ( ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g harness. The information was received that M/s Arihant Metal Corporation, Gurgaon (in short the Corporation ), a registered dealer, was dealing in goods like brass sheets, circles, brass strips, copper strips etc. and is purchasing the said items mainly from M/s Agarwal Metal Works Pvt. Ltd., Rewari. It was found that the Corporation had altered the description of the goods, i.e. brass circles as brass sheets and brass strips as brass sheets etc. in the invoices to facilitate the buyers to avail inadmissible Cenvat Credit without actually receiving the goods. By adopting this modus operandi the Corporation diverted the duty paid brass circles/strips/sheets purchased from M/s Agarwal Metal Works Pvt. Ltd. in the open market. On the basi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sed of the cross-objections. Hence, the present appeal. 4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties. 5. Learned counsel for the revenue submitted that the Tribunal has wrongly rejected the appeal of the revenue without considering the arguments raised by the department and relevant provisions of law. It was also urged that the impugned order does not satisfy the test of being a reasoned and speaking order and was, thus, liable to be quashed. 6. On the other hand, the impugned order was supported by learned counsel for the respondent. 7. The Hon'ble Apex Court in M/s Kranti Associates Pvt. Ltd. and another v. Sh. Masood Ahmed Khan and others, (2010) 9 SCC 496 while dealing with the requirement of passing a reasoned ord ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iderations. (f) Reasons have virtually become as indispensable component of a decision making process as observing principles of natural justice by judicial, quasi-judicial and even by administrative bodies. (g) Reasons facilitate the process of judicial review by superior Courts. (h) The ongoing judicial trend in all countries committed to rule of law and constitutional governance is in favour of reasoned decisions based on relevant facts. This is virtually the life blood of judicial decision making justifying the principle that reason is the soul of justice. (i) Judicial or even quasi-judicial opinions these days can be as different as the judges and authorities who deliver them. All these decisions serve one common purpose wh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... easons must be given for judicial decisions . (o) In all common law jurisdictions judgments play a vital role in setting up precedents for the future. Therefore, for development of law, requirement of giving reasons for the decision is of the essence and is virtually a part of Due Process . 8. A show cause notice dated 8.10.2010 was issued to the assessee for recovery of ₹ 33,13,670/- along with interest and penalty for wrongly availing and utilizing Cenvat Credit. The Adjudicating Authority vide order dated 1.2.2012 (Annexure A-1) confirmed the said demand along with interest and also imposed penalty of equal amount, i.e., ₹ 33,13,670/-. Feeling aggrieved, the assessee filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Central E ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y the manufacturer/ supplier. It was only recorded that the revenue had failed to produce corroborative evidence to prove that the respondent had not received the goods against the invoices issued by the Corporation. The Tribunal being a final fact finding authority was required to deal with all aspects of facts and law and then record its conclusions based thereon. No legally justified reasons have been recorded by the Tribunal for dismissing the appeal of the revenue. 11. In view of the above, since the order dated 20.4.2015 (Annexure A-4) does not qualify being a reasoned speaking order as enunciated by the Apex Court in M/s Kranti Associates Pvt. Ltd's case (supra), accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the order dated 20.4.20 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
