TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (6) TMI 821
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nd Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as "the Tribunal") claiming the following substantial questions of law:- (i) Whether the respondent can avail CENVAT credit in respect of Capital Goods used exclusively for the purpose of Research and Development of New Model, localization of CKD parts, localization of inner parts of suppliers, quality and warranty analysis and counter measure and components and vehicle level testing, as the machines/equipments/apparatus/ capital goods in question are not used for the manufacture of goods but are solely used for the purpose of Research and Development? (ii) Whether a place separate from manufacture/ manufacturing process located in the unit where only R&....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Excise Commissionerate, Delhi-III from 20th to 23rd, 26th, 27th and 29th November, 2012, on test check of records for the year 2011-12, it was found that they had availed CENVAT credit qua machines/equipment/apparatus installed in Engineering Research Design and Development building and lab located separately from the production area used exclusively for R&D for new models development, localization of CKD parts, localization of inner parts of suppliers quality and warranty analysis and countermeasures and component and vehicles testing purpose amounting to Rs. 10,38,87,794/- for the period from November 2007 to October, 2012. The CENVAT Credit so availed appeared to be inadmissible as the machines/equipment/apparatus in question were not us....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ion 'speaking order' was first coined by Lord Chancellor Earl Cairns in a rather strange context. The Lord Chancellor, while explaining the ambit of Writ of Certiorari, referred to orders with errors on the face of the record and pointed out that an order with errors on its face, is a speaking order. (See 1878-97 Vol. 4 Appeal Cases 30 at 40 of the report). 18. This Court always opined that the face of an order passed by a quasi-judicial authority or even an administrative authority affecting the rights of parties, must speak. It must not be like the 'inscrutable face of a Sphinx'. 19 to 50 XX XX XX 51. Summarizing the above discussion, this Court holds: (a) In India the judicial trend has....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....levant factors have been objectively considered. This is important for sustaining the litigants' faith in the justice delivery system. (j) Insistence on reason is a requirement for both judicial accountability and transparency. (k) If a Judge or a quasi-judicial authority is not candid enough about his/her decision making process then it is impossible to know whether the person deciding is faithful to the doctrine of precedent or to principles of incrementalism. (l) Reasons in support of decisions must be cogent, clear and succinct. A pretence of reasons or 'rubber-stamp reasons' is not to be equated with a valid decision making process. (m) It cannot be doubted that transparency is the sine q....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rder dated 15.1.2015 (Annexure A-3) allowed the appeal. The Tribunal while allowing the appeal of the respondent had dealt with the issue in para 3 of the order. A perusal thereof shows that it does not satisfy the test of a reasoned and speaking order. Para 3 is quoted below:- "The definition of capital goods as given in Rule 2(a) of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004 covers the goods listed in this sub Rule, which have been 'used in the factory of manufacture of final product.' Thus, for capital goods Cenvat Credit, their use in or in relation to manufacture of final product is not required and their use in the factory of manufacture for the purpose whether in or in relation to manufacture or for any other purpose including R&....