9911796707
TMI Blog2000 (11) TMI 198X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... onounced the judgment vide O. A. No. 2858 of 1977 on 2-5-1989 [1998 (43)) E.L.T. 161 (S.C.)]. As per order the investigation were made in this regard to establish whether five customer companies were favoured buyers or not. In this connection the Superintendent Range Shikhohabad was enquired and his enquiry report clearly indicates that M/s. Hind Lamps Shikohabad have no contract/agreement between their customer companies with regard to sale of Electric Lightening Bulbs and Fluorescent tubes. The price of their product and the condition of sale are fixed by their Board of Directors from time to time considering the market conditions and such prices are communicated to customer companies. Main issue involves in this whether these five custom ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f he felt that the A.C. has not done an adequate job. (d) As regards the plea of the order having been passed without mentioning the Price List number and a vague direction being given to Range Supdt. he found these objections and that of order being not speaking though correct on facts, as they exist, to be only technical objections. The order clearly indicates that price lists from 1-10-1975 till date are finally approved clearly apply to the lists effective during the period and there is no vagueness in the order. (e) He upheld the order of Range Supdt. pursuant to this order of the A.C. to be proper and correct. 3. Revenue has filed the present appeal against the findings of the Commissioner (Appeals) on the grounds :- (a) O ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ord and find :- (a) there is no apparent infirmity in the order of the Assistant Collector having ordered the finalisation of all the PLs pending before him since the matter was pending in Courts and up to date as the Assistant Collector is the proper officer for finalisation of PLs and he can cause such enquiries to be made as he deems fit (In this case he got it done through Range Supdt.) and pass the order of final approval of the List. If the Collector has any material with him to hold the approval of the PL to be not legal or proper, they could have taken up that material to Commissioner (Appeals). The Commissioner (Appeals) to our mind has considered that aspect and observed that an independent enquiry could have been caused by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ereinabove indicates to us an application of mind as best as the AC could and the order is speaking as much as it could. There is no format an order has to conform, to be considered a speaking order. If it can convey what it intends and gives reasons for coming to a particular decision on it, it cannot be considered non-speaking. We find no justification to call the AC's order in this case as non-speaking order. (d) As regards the direction to Range Supdt. we do not find them to be vague. The Range Supdt. has proceeded to finalise assessments under Rule 173-I and the same have been done. No evidence is placed or reasons given as to how these assessments made were not legal or proper. Therefore, we find no force in this plea. (e) As r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
