2018 (10) TMI 1416

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Rajesh Ostwal i/b. PROMPT Legal For the Respondent : Mr. Pradeep S. Jetly with Mr. J.B. Mishra ORDER P.C: This Appeal under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (the Act), challenges the order dated 2nd November, 2017 passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (the Tribunal). 2 The Appellant urges the following question of law fo....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he submission on merits. 6 Being aggrieved by the above order dated 7th June, 2013, of the Commissioner, the Revenue filed an appeal to the Tribunal. The Tribunal by the impugned order dated 2nd November, 2017, allowed the Revenue's appeal, by way of remand to the Commissioner for fresh adjudication. The impugned order dated 2nd November, 2017 holds the order dated 7th June, 2017 of the Com....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e parties. It merely proceeds on its perusal of the order of the Commissioner and comes to the conclusion that the order has been passed without any reasons inasmuch as same does not exhibit the mind of the author. 8 On the other hand, Mr. Jetly, learned Counsel for the Revenue, submits that no interference is warranted. This on the ground that no prejudice would be caused as the impugned order....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... to the authority which passed the order in appeal. However, the word "may if it thinks fit", is not an arbitrary or subjective satisfaction of the Tribunal but a satisfaction reached through the filter of reasons in the context of the grievance of the parties before it. In the impugned order, we find that the Tribunal has concluded that the order of the Commissioner in appeal is, incapable of und....