AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Heard Sri Udit Chandra, learned counsel for the appellant-assessee and Sri B.K. Singh Raghuvanshi, learned counsel for the department. This appeal is taken up for final disposal with the consent of the parties.
Short question of law which arises in the present appeal is as to whether the order passed by the First Appellate Authority can be set aside by the Tribunal without meeting the reasons recorded in the order of the First Appellate Authority.
It would be worthwhile to reproduce the order of the Tribunal impugned in the present appeal dated 4th July, 2012. It reads as follows :
"There is no dispute that there was delay in Service Tax. The delay is to be compensated by interest as is ruled by legislature. There is no immunity granted to any sector under law. Therefore, appeal of Revenue is allowed setting aside first appellate order."
From the order of the Tribunal impugned in the present appeal we find that except for recording that there has been delay in deposit of the Service Tax and the delay is to be compensated by interest, no other reasons have been recorded for upsetting the findings recorded by the First Appellate Authority. The First Appellate Authority had found it just and proper to waive of the interest after recording a finding that the money had been deposited in the specific account of the Central Government and that too on day-to-day basis.
We are of the considered opinion that the minimum expected from the Tribunal was to pass a reasoned order, which may disclose the application of mind for the purpose of upsetting the finding recorded by the First Appellate Authority.
The Apex Court in its judgment in the case of State of Uttaranchal and Another Vs. Sunil Kumar Singh Negi, AIR 2008 SC 2026 : (2008) 118 FLR 18 : (2008) 4 JT 303 : (2008) 2 LLJ 874 : (2008) 4 SCALE 22 : (2008) 11 SCC 205 : (2008) 2 SCC(L&S) 1093 : (2008) AIRSCW 2684 : (2008) 2 Supreme 527 as well as in the case of Raj Kishore Jha Vs. State of Bihar and Others, AIR 2003 SC 4664 : (2003) CriLJ 5040 : (2003) 2 JT 354 Supp : (2003) 8 SCALE 271 : (2003) 11 SCC 519 : (2003) 4 SCR 208 Supp : (2003) AIRSCW 5095 : (2003) AIRSCW 5095 : (2003) 7 Supreme 152 : (2003) 7 Supreme 152 has held that reasons are heart beat of every conclusion, without the same it is lifeless. In view of the aforesaid, the present Central Excise appeal is allowed. The order of the Tribunal dated 4th July, 2012 is hereby set aside. The appeal before the Tribunal is restored to its original number. Let the appeal be decided afresh by means of a reasoned speaking order, preferably within three months from the date a certified copy of this order is filed before the Tribunal.