Commissioner Of Central Excise, ... vs M/S. Hindustan Coca Cola Beverages Pvt. ...
- CitationAppeal No.109/2013, dated 25.03.2013 passed by the Commissioner of Customs, Central Excis
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The Commissioner (Appeals) erred in allowing the assessee's appeal by merely citing case law without examining the material facts and evidence on record, and in disregarding the detailed examination of all thirteen services made by the adjudicating authority; a first appellate authority must test the evidence on record before reversing or setting aside an adjudication order, and must pass a reasoned, speaking order applying the law to the facts after affording a fair opportunity of hearing, so where it fails to do so the matter is to be remitted to it for fresh consideration.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
[Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No.109/2013, dated 25.03.2013 passed by the Commissioner of Customs, Central Excise & Service Tax (Appeals), Chennai]
COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, CHENNAI-IV APPELLANT
Versus
M/s. HINDUSTAN COCA COLA BEVERAGES PVT. LTD. RESPONDENT
Appearance:
For the Appellant Shri L. Paneerselvan, AC (AR)
For the Respondent None
CORAM:
Honble Shri D.N. Panda, Judicial Member
Date of hearing/decision 22-09-2015
FINAL ORDER NO. 41260 / 2015
It is very strange to notice from the order of learned Commissioner (Appeals), that he suo motto granted relief to assessee simply quoting case laws in his order without examining the material facts and evidence recorded by the Adjudicating authority who had categorically examined all the 13 services, as is apparent from page 5 of the Adjudication order dated 30.01.2012. That authority has rightly understood the matter in controversy material facts and evidence aas well as law applicable and has applied the same in the given facts and circumstances of the case by detailed and elaborate examination appearing in Pages 5 to 7 of his order to reach to his conclusion. When such a useful examination was done; that should not have been discarded without testing evidence on record. In view of the above manner of passing of appeal order, matter is remitted to Commissioner (Appeals) to re-examine all the 13 services individually with evidence available on record and pass a reasonable and speaking order applying the law granting fair opportunity of hearing. (Dictated and pronounced in open court)
(D.N. PANDA) JUDICIAL MEMBER
ksr 26-09-2015
DRAFT Remarks
I II III
Date of dictation 22.09.2015
Draft Order - Date of typing 23.09.2015
Fair Order Typing 26.07.2015
Date of number and date of dispatch 28.09.2015
4 E/42179/2013
This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.
Research this judgment with Miss Lucy
Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.
Try Miss Lucy free