9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (5) TMI 113X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ommon judgment. Facts, in brief, of the present case are that the revisionists are a Private Limited Company incorporated under the provisions of Indian Companies Act, 1956 and obtained the Registration Under U.P. VAT Act and Rules framed thereunder. On 25.9.2009, Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Tax, Lucknow passed a provisional assessment order under Section 25 (1) of U.P. VAT Act, 2008 and held that impugned product/goods i.e. Thermoplastic Road Marking Material is chargeable to the tax @ 12.5% as it is unclassified material like paint under Schedule V of the UP VAT Act as against the claim of the revisionist that it is classifiable under Schedule II- Part A at Entry No.29 of U.P. VAT Act payable @ 4% VAT. Aggrieved by the said order ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... contrary to law as laid down in the following cases:- "(a) Commissioner of Customs (Import), Mumbai v/s. Warstila India Ltd. 2010 (254) ELT 406 (Bom.) (b) Century Textile & Ind. Ltd. v/s Union of India 2008 (232) ELT 389 (Bom.) (c) Siemes Engineering and Manufacturing Company of India Limited v/s Union of India and another CDJ 1976 SC 389 = 1976 AIR (SC) 1785" Shri Abinav Narain Trivedi, learned Addl. Chief Standing Counsel submits that so far as the judgment give in the case of M/S Nitin Agencies (supra) concerned it is rendered by a single member of the Tribunal whereas the judgment given in the present case is by two members. Hence, argument advanced by learned counsel for the revisionist is wholly misconceived and on the said ground ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ercedes Benz India Private Limited. v. Union of India and others in Writ Petition No.1614 of 2010 decided on 17th March 2010 (unreported), [Since reported in 2010 (252) E.L.T. 168 (Bom.) wherein we were required to set aside the impugned order and remit it back to the Tribunal for consideration afresh, borrowing observations made by the Apex Court in the following words:- We are not happy to observe but constrained to say that one must remember that pursuit of the law, however glamorous it is, has its own limitation on the Bench. In a multi judge court, the judges are bound by precedents and procedure. They could use their discretion only when there is no declared principle to be found, no rule and no authority. the judicial decorum and le ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ircumstances, the Tribunal disagree with the judgment passed in the case of M/S Nitin Agencies (supra) wherein it has been held that Thermoplastic Road Marking Material classified under Schedule chargeable to 4% tax, rather on the point in issue, the order in question is a non speaking order as no reason has been assigned for disagreeing with the view taken by Commercial Tax Tribunal, Ghaziabad that Thermoplastic Road Marking Material Classified as "Chemical Compound" falling under Schedule II Part C of U.P. VAT Act, 2008 and chargeable to 4% Tax. It is well settled law that an order passed by an authority should be a reasoned one and the objection taken by a person should be dealt with because reasons are like a live wire which connects t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
