9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (9) TMI 1198X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t the submissions/grounds raised by the petitioner in the statutory appeal have not even been adverted to, much less dealt with. The impugned order passed by the Appellate Authority, as such, cannot sustain. The present writ petition is partly allowed and the order dated 29.06.2022 at Annexure P-7 is set aside - The matter is remanded back for consideration afresh at the hands of the Appellate Authority and after taking into account all the submissions and contentions raised by the petitioner in the appeal at Annexure P-6. - CWP-17957-2022 (O&M) - - - Dated:- 15-9-2022 - HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJINDER SINGH DHINDSA. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK MANCHANDA. Present:- Mr. Chetan Jain, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Gurpr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Repeated adjournments have thereafter been sought at the hands of the State. Even during the course of hearing today, Mr. Gurpreet Singh, learned Additional Advocate General, Punjab is not in a position to advance submissions in support of the impugned order passed by the Appellate Authority at Annexure P-7. Neither has any response been filed. Having heard counsel for the parties and having perused the pleadings on record, we are of the view that the legality of the order dated 11.01.2021 (Annexure P-5) passed by the Assistant Commissioner, State Tax, Bathinda raising demand of tax/penalty need not be gone into at this stage. Such view is being taken for the reason that the facts of the case make out a case for remand to the Appellate ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... does not arise at all. It has been stressed in the appeal as regards the goods being wrongly classified as tax free animal feed supplement with HSN 2309 whereas the goods being residue/waste of distillery covered under HSN 2303 are taxable @ 5%. It had also been asserted in the appeal that no discrepancy has been noticed in the physical verification report issued by the STO on 23.12.2020 or in the detention order issued by the ACMW on 28.01.2021. It had also been asserted in the appeal that physical verification issued on 23.12.2020 and detention order on 28.01.2021, have been after the goods already stood released on 18.12.2020 and the fact of release of goods being on record as per para 4.1 of the order dated 11.01.2021 which was su ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of reasons, as held by a Constitution Bench of this Court in the case of S.N.Mukherjee vs. Union of India reported in (1990) 4 SCC 594, is that people must have confidence in the judicial or quasi-judicial authorities. 10. Unless reasons are disclosed, how can a person know whether the authority has applied its mind or not? Also, giving of reasons minimizes chances of arbitrariness. Hence, it is an essential requirement of the rule of law that some reasons, at least in brief, must be disclosed in a judicial or quasi-judicial order, even if it is an order of affirmation. No doubt, in S.N. Mukherjee's case (supra), it has been observed (vide para 36) that: ..The appellate or revisional authority, if it affirms such an o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
