9911796707
Advanced Search 
TMI Blog2019 (12) TMI 1063X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... just enrichment and amount otherwise liable for refund should not to be credited to Consumer Welfare Fund. After receiving the same, the appellant submitted his defence reply to the show-cause notice on 04.04.2006 alongwith proof, inter alia, stating therein that the appellant has not passed on the duty to the buyers, as such is entitled to refund. The respondent-Assistant Commissioner, Central Excise Division-II, Lucknow rejected the reply of the appellant to the show-cause notice dated 18.01.2006 and passed the order dated 31.08.2006, thereby rejected the claim of refund of the amount i.e. Rs. 5,51,739/- on the ground that the invoices issued by the appellant between 11.09.2003 to 30.01.2004 clearly show that the Central Excise Duty @ 16% separately was charged from the customers/buyers. Aggrieved by the order dated 31.08.2006, the appellant filed an appeal before the Appellate Authority/Commissioner (Appeals) Custom, Central Excise & Service Tax, Lucknow on 07.11.2006. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that before the Appellate Authority, the appellant has categorically stated and pleaded on the basis of the documents and material that the appellant has not charged ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the excise duty to the buyer and in the present case, on the basis of the material available on record, which was placed before the Authorities concerned, the appellant has failed to prove the said facts, so there is no irregularity and infirmity in the impugned order. "12B. Presumption that incidence of duty has been passed on to the buyer.-Every person who has paid the duty of excise on any goods under this Act shall, unless the contrary is proved by him, be deemed to have passed on the full incidence of such duty to the buyer of such goods." Needless to mention herein that during the course of arguments, learned counsel for the appellant has placed certain documents by way of supplementary affidavit and on the basis of the same it is submitted that the same were on record of the Revenues and from the same it is crystal clear that the appellant has not passed on the excise duty to the buyers, as such, the argument raised by the learned counsel for the respondent with the aid of Section 12 (B) of the Act, 1944 is wholly misconceived and it is clearly established and proved by the appellant that the excise duty was not passed over to the buyers. Further, during the course of ar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he reasons of deduction? (2) Whether the Tribunal has committed substantial illegality by not considering the principles of law reported in 2006 (10) SCC, 129- C.C.E. Vs. Panhihati Rubber Ltd. Sri Rajesh Chauhan has filed memo of appearance on behalf of respondent No. 1, hence it is not necessary to issue notice." However, in view of the facts and grounds, as stated before us, we feel that for the purposes of adjudicating this appeal, the following question is required to be considered:- "Whether the Tribunal was under obligation to consider all the material evidence available before it and while discarding the same, it was incumbent upon the Tribunal to record reasons." From the bare perusal of Section 12 (B) of the Act, 1944, quoted hereinabove, the intention of the legislature is crystal clear that it is the duty of the concerned to prove that he has not passed on the excise duty to the buyer. For the purposes of decision on the question framed by us, we feel it appropriate to quote the relevant portion of the order of the Tribunal dated 10.12.2009, under appeal, which on reproduction reads as under:- "6. I have carefully considered the submissions from both sides and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s for coming to the conclusion that the appellant is not entitled for refund of the amount in issue. The expression 'Judgment' has been defined in section 2(9) of C.P.C., as "judgment means the statement given by the Judge on the grounds of a decree or order." Thus the essential element in any 'judgment' is the statement of grounds of decision, meaning thereby the Court has to state the ground on which it bases its decision. It must be intelligible and must have a meaning. It is distinct from an order as the letter may not contain reasons. Unless the judgment is based on reason, it would not be possible for an Appellate/Revisional Court to decide as to whether the judgment is in accordance with law. (Vide: Surendra Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh, AIR 1954 SC 194: 1954 SCJ 12 : 1954 SCR 330; and Arjan Dass Ram Lal v. Jagan Nath Sardari Lal, AIR 1966 Pun 227). A judgment is the expression of the opinion of the Court arrived at after due consideration of the evidence and the arguments, it means a judicial determination, (vide: U.J.S. Chopra v. State of Bombay, AIR 1955 SC 633: 1955 SCJ 603: (1955) 2 SCR 94; and State of Bihar v. Ram Naresh Pandey, AIR 1957 SC 389: ( ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
