Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + HC Central Excise - 2019 (7) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (7) TMI 651 - HC - Central ExciseMaintainability of writ - Section 35B of the Central Excise Act, 1944 - Non-speaking order - the impugned order dated 11th May 2018 ignores earlier orders in respect of the same petitioner-assessee being final orders No.A/8537385374/ 17/EB dated 20th September 2016 and No.A/8674186742/ 17/EB dated 21st March 2017, which according to the petitioner is on identical facts - HELD THAT:- The Tribunal in the impugned order seems to do away with its obligation to be bound by the decisions of its coordinate Benches by observing that “the issue of revenue neutrality is to be decided on the basis of facts of each case and the judgments cited by the appellant cannot be made applicable automatically”. Once the litigant before the Tribunal placed reliance upon the decision of the a coordinate Bench of the Tribunal, then a speaking order would require the Tribunal to consider those decisions and state how and why the aforesaid decisions are not applicable to the facts of the present case. - In the absence of this exercise is being done, the impugned order itself suffer from being a non speaking order. We find that where Authorities like the Tribunal functioning within the State of Maharashtra exercise jurisdiction in breach of principles of natural justice or in flagrant disregard of the law of precedents by not referring the issue to the President for constituting a Larger Bench of Tribunal, if it did not agree with the earlier decisions of the Tribunal then we would certainly exercise our writ jurisdiction. Merely stating that the earlier judgments would not be applicable, without more, would not meet the requirement of an order with reasons - impugned order is set aside
|