Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2009 (10) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2009 (10) TMI 379 - CESTAT, NEW DELHIDelegation by adjudicating authority- The appellants are engaged in manufacture of Ceramic tiles having their units located in the State of Rajasthan and Uttar Pradesh. They are having their corporate office at New Delhi and it is their case that they used to take input service credit on the strength of distribution invoices raised by their corporate office in respect of advertising services, commission agency services, house keeping services, manpower recruitment services, AMC services, security services, exhibition services etc. and used to distribute such expenses between Gailpur plant arid Sikanderabad plant in the ratio of 56% arid 44% respectively. On allegation that the appellants had wrongly availed the Cenvat credit amounting to Rs.60,62,680/- during the period 2006-2007 on the services used exclusively for the exempted goods, show cause notice came to be issued and matter being contested, the same was disposed off by the impugned order. Held that- The Commissioner who was the Adjudicating Authority had, to analysis of the records by himself in order to fix the duty liability upon the assessee and he could not have delegated this function to his subordinate. Even assuming that the investigation could have been done through his subordinate, it was the duty of the adjudicating authority to arrive at a correct finding on the material issue on the basis of analysis of the records and all the materials placed before him and not to decide solely on the basis of the observation by his subordinate. Being so, the impugned order cannot be sustained. For the reasons stated above, the impugned order is set aside and the matter is remanded to the Commissioner who shall decide the matter afresh in accordance with the provisions of law. The appeal is disposed off in the above terms.
|