Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + HC Central Excise - 2019 (3) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (3) TMI 1179 - HC - Central ExciseRe-credit of duty - goods returned by the customer - fictitious invoices or not - Non-speaking order - Whether the scrap generated in the hands of the job-worker was not supported by the duty-paid documents involving demand of ₹ 1,10,656/-? - Held that:- There is a merit in the submission made on behalf of the Revenue. This as we find that the impugned order of the Tribunal does record the appellant’s submissions and only after consideration of the same has come to the conclusion that the issue would require reconsideration by Adjudicating Authority. Therefore, remanded this issue to the Adjudicating Authority. So far as other issues are concerned, we find that the impugned order of the Tribunal merely proceeds to record its conclusion. When an Appellate Authority is in agreement with the lower authority's decision, it does not absolve him to briefly indicate his reasons in the context of the submissions made in the appeal by the party. We find that on the above issues, the impugned order does not record any submissions made by the parties before it. This manner of dealing with an appeal by the Tribunal is not appreciated. The Tribunal is a final fact finding Authority under the Act. It must necessarily record the essence of dispute before it and give its findings on consideration of submissions made in the context of the dispute. It is only when such an exercise is done, the order would be a speaking order. It is only when the conclusions arrived at in the order of the Tribunal passes through the process of apparent reasoning, can it be called a speaking order - the issues are answered in the negative i.e. in favour of the appellant and against the respondent. Appeal disposed off.
|