TMI Blog2019 (4) TMI 1272X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssioner (Appeals). The order passed by CESTAT is devoid of any reason. The decision of the Commissioner is overruled with a single observation that there is no foundation in the show cause notice bringing out whether any service element is involved while renting the wagons by the respondent Assessee to the Railways and that in the absence of any such foundation, there cannot be taxability. CESTAT while deciding the Appeal has to exercise its jurisdiction as a fact finding authority. We find that the CESTAT has recorded only an abrupt finding without discussing the issue and without mentioning any reason for their conclusion. The Commissioner after a detailed discussion on the facts of the case passed a reasoned order and decided the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 'Large Taxpayer's Unit' in July, 2008. The Assessee also holds service tax registration. By an agreement dated 12/06/2009 between the Assessee and the Central Railways, the respondent Assessee has given 416 wagons to Railways on lease/rent for 20 years. By letters dated 29/09/2011 and 07/12/2011, the Assessee informed the Railways that they had received an amount of ₹ 13,04,29,833/ from Railways during the financial year 2008 09 to 2011 12 (upto December 2011). According to the appellant, the said activity of the leasing of wagons is liable to service tax under the category of supply of tangible goods services under section 65(105) (zzzzj) of the Finance Act, 1994. These facts were concealed by the Assessee and found ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... recorded detailed findings and by a reasoned order adjudicated the show cause notice. Learned Counsel would submit that while reversing the well reasoned order of the Commissioner, there is absolutely no discussion in the impugned order as to why the Appeal deserves to be allowed. Learned Counsel would submit that the CESTAT, while hearing the Appeal filed under section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944, section 129(B) of the Customs Act, 1962 and Finance Act, 1994, is a fact finding authority and expected to pass a reasoned order in support of its conclusions. Learned Counsel would submit that the CESTAT has recorded an abrupt finding without discussing the issue raised before it and without recording any reasons for its conclusion. Lear ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssessee contended that perusal of the order passed by the Commissioner is sufficient to conclude that the order passed by the CESTAT does not call for any interference. He would submit that if Tribunal holds that there is no foundation in the show cause notice bringing out whether any service element is involved while renting wagons by the respondent Assessee to the Railways, and 'in absence of any such foundation, there cannot be any taxibility'. According to him, it cannot be said that the view of the Tribunal is perverse so as to warrant any interference. He would submit that though the Tribunal is a fact finding authority, but when the very foundation of the appellant's case about there being any service element involved wh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... entered into an agreement dated 12.06.2009. As per this agreement the Railways have taken 416 Wagons on lease from the assessee for 20 years on the lease/rent charges mutually agreed upon by the both the parties. (b) The assessee vide their letter F.No. RCF/Thal Excise/2011 12 dated 29.09.2011 and on 07.12.2011 submitted the information that they have received lease rent amounting to ₹ 13,04,29,833/ from the Railways during the period 2008 09 to 2011 12 (Upto December, 2011). (c) This activity of the assessee of leasing railway wagons to Railways is liable to Service Tax under the category of Supply of tangible goods service under Section 65(105)(zzzzj). 13. After considering the defen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s overruled with a single observation that there is no foundation in the show cause notice bringing out whether any service element is involved while renting the wagons by the respondent Assessee to the Railways and that in the absence of any such foundation, there cannot be taxability. CESTAT while deciding the Appeal has to exercise its jurisdiction as a fact finding authority. We find that the CESTAT has recorded only an abrupt finding without discussing the issue and without mentioning any reason for their conclusion. 16. The Commissioner after a detailed discussion on the facts of the case passed a reasoned order and decided the Appeal. These facts are not adverted to or dealt with by CESTAT. The perfunctory manner in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
