Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2015 (6) TMI 784

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... failure to have inspected the appellant s records, law does not authorize a conclusion of non- maintenance of separate accounts, without any basis. There is not a single sentence in the entire adjudication order which records the evidence or material on the basis of which the Adjudicating Authority records the finding that the appellant failed to maintain separate accounts. In the absence of the Adjudicating Authority recording a clear finding that the assessee failed to maintain separate accounts and on the basis of some evidence in support of such conclusion, the inference of a failure to maintain separate accounts, is a finding of fact based on no evidence. It is therefore perverse. On the basis of submission it is contended, that .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 2014 clearly and categorically pleaded in paragraph 6 (c) of the reply that the allegation of availment of Cenvat credit on common inputs and common input services is incorrect and baseless and it had availed credit only in respect of inputs and input services used for providing taxable services. Appellant also categorically pleaded that the show cause notice failed to reveal any basis for the allegation of irregular availment of credit on inputs related to both taxable and exempted services. 4. In the adjudication order, after reproducing contents of the show cause notice in paragraph 1 to 8, the response of the assessee is set out in paragraphs 9 to 22 including contentions urged by the appellant during personal hearing. In para 16 of .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... This observation is fallacious. Revenue had alleged that the appellant failed to maintain separate accounts. The appellant disputed this allegation and specifically pleaded to have maintained separate accounts and to have used only, those inputs/input services which were used for providing texable services. If there was a doubt either regarding maintenance of separate accounts or utilizing credit on common inputs/input services, as required under Rule 6 (2) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, the authorities ought to have summoned the appellants records or should have verified from the appellant s premises, whether assessee had incorrectly pleaded to have maintained separate records while it did not. In the absence of any such notice issued and in .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... n para 27 it is observed that it is not the burden of Revenue to establish that the appellant maintained separate accounts. In the absence of the Adjudicating Authority recording a clear finding that the assessee failed to maintain separate accounts and on the basis of some evidence in support of such conclusion, the inference of a failure to maintain separate accounts, is a finding of fact based on no evidence. It is therefore perverse. We have earlier also noticed a mis-statement of fact in para 27, i.e., the observation that the appellant admitted to have availed Cenvat credit on common inputs and input services. 8. For the aforesaid reasons, the impugned order cannot be sustained. 9. Learned Counsel for the appellant refers to the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... based on an admission (non-existent) of the appellant, of having availed Cenvat credit on common inputs and input services of both taxable and exempted services and the other finding regarding the burden of proof being on appellant to establish that it had not maintained separate records. However, such a course of disposition of an appeal would not enable adjudicating authorities to pursue judicial discipline in recording adjudication orders and eschew perversity in adjudicating functions. 11. The principal is too well established that reasons are the links between material on which conclusions are based and the eventual conclusions, vide Union of India vs. M.L. Capoor AIR 1974 SC 87. 12. In the circumstances, we quash the impugned .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates