TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (10) TMI 157
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 1. In all these appeals, the only contention raised before us by Mr. Shroff, learned senior counsel appearing for the appellants is that though miscellaneous applications were filed by the appellants and claiming provisional release of the goods seized, the tribunal, on the understanding of the assesses as also the Revenue, decided to take up all the appeals for final disposal. The understanding was that no interim or ad-hoc order or direction be issued but the questions and arising from the factual controversy between the parties be settled once and for all. The findings must govern all the issues and on merits. Once this was the understanding between the parties and the tribunal was aware of it, then, it was obliged to pass a reasoned o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....disposal of the appeals by the tribunal. With the consent of both sides, we admit these appeals on the following substantial question of law:- "Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the appellate tribunal is right in passing the order after five months twenty days from the date of hearing contrary to the judgment of this court in the case of Shivsagar Veg. Restaurant vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai [2009(13) STR 11 (Bom.)] and Emco Ltd. vs. Uniion of India [2015 (19) ELT 28 (Bom.)]?" 5. With the consent of both sides, we dispose of these appeals finally. 6. The tribunal was aware that though some requests were made and of the nature noted in great details by the appellants in the memo of appeals....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he further date, namely, 29th July, 2015, the tribunal takes up the case. The Assistant Commissioner addressed a letter on 7th July, 2015 requesting one laboratory and after referring to the contents of that letter, by consent of both sides, the tribunal directs that the samples be drawn and sent to this laboratory, namely M/s. Ultra Tech Environmental Consultancy and Laboratory. The tribunal stipulated 15 days for that purpose. Then, the tribunal took up the matter on 20th August, 2015. On 20th August, 2015, it granted 15 days further time. 8. From the record, it is then pointed out that the tribunal, instead of adverting to the above material and the written submissions, has passed an order, which is now impugned, but after five months....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d to what extent has not been satisfactorily concluded. The tribunal has not, beyond one paragraph, adverted to the factual exercise and which was permitted by the tribunal by its interim orders. By consent, certain directions were issued and what has resulted therefrom and whether that aids and assists the tribunal in arriving at the final conclusion has not been adverted to. We do not find any reference to these aspects. What facts and circumstances have been carefully examined has not been clarified. Once we are not in agreement with the manner in which the tribunal has dealt with the appeals, then, we have no alternative but to quash and set aside the impugned order. The tribunal should focus its attention on the core issue, must refer ....