9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (2) TMI 59X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Ravindran, Member (J) [Order].- 1. This appeal is directed against the Order-in-Appeal No. SVS/143/NGP-C/2007 dated 14-3-2007 passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), Nagpur vide which the Commissioner (Appeals) has upheld the entire Order-in-Original confirming the demand of duty and imposing penalty on the appellants, ordering recovery of interest under section 14(sic)(Rule 14) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. 2. The issue in this appeal is regarding availment of Cenvat credit on the input service (security agency) utilized by the appellants for residential colony which is adjacent to the factory. It is the contention of the Revenue that the security services utilized by the appellant would not fall under the catego ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e findings given by the adjudicating authority and there is no case for remanding the matter back to the appellate authority, on this around. 5. Regarding merits, it was submitted that the security services utilized at Residential colony, does not play any part either directly or indirectly in the manufacture of final products. 6. On perusal of the record, I find that the Commissioner (Appeals) while upholding the Order-in-Original in paras 9.5 and 9.6 holds as under: 9.5. The adjudicating authority in para 14 and 15 in its order while rejecting the contention of the appellant has examined and observed as under: 14. Further, I find that 'Security' is included in the definition of input service referred above. But t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... en various grounds of appeal before him as is reflected from paras 7.2 to 7.15 of the Order-in-Appeal. Mere reading of these paragraphs indicate that the appellants have challenged, very same findings on which the Commissioner (Appeals) is agreeing with the adjudicating authority (as reproduced in para 4 above). This would indicate that the Commissioner (Appeals) has not dealt with any of the grounds which are raised by the appellant before him. The reliance on the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Cyril Lasrado (Dead) by Lrs and Others versus Juliana Maria Lasrado and Another reported in 2004 (7) SCC 431 seems to be correct. The relevant (paras11 and 12) portion of judgment are reproduced: 11. Reasons introduce clarity i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ords, a speaking out. The inscrutable face of the sphinx is ordinarily incongruous with a judicial or quasi-judicial performance. 8. As such, I find that the ratio as laid down by the Apex Court is squarely applicable to the facts of the present case. 9. Hence, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Impugned order being non-speaking as it has not dealt with grounds of appeal raised by the appellants, is unsustainable and liable to be set aside. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the matter is remanded for de novo adjudication proceedings to the Commissioner (Appeals). The Commissioner (Appeals) shall grant an opportunity of personal hearing to the appellants and shall consider all the gr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
