TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (8) TMI 742
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ereinafter referred to as "the AMC") is offered by the revisionist. The object of the AMC is to maintain the product in good working condition. For this purpose the revisionist enters into a 'service contract' i.e. the AMC for a pre specified period with its customers and the contract includes thorough checking, adjusting, trouble shooting, software checking etc. 5. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the revisionist that any defective or worn out part of a computer is replaced at the sole discretion of the revisionist Company with a part in running condition . If the part is replaced, the replaced part becomes the property of the revisionist. However, the revisionist does not charge any amount or money for the same. 6. Controversy in the present case arose when the revisionist was assessed for the assessment year 1998-99 and 2000-01, whereby the Assessing Authority imposed Trade Tax on the amount of Rs. 42,00,000/- i.e. the value of the goods used in replacement under warranty and AMC. The Assessing Authority has taxed the turn over on spare part holding that the same was used while execution of AMC. 7. Aggrieved by the assessment orders, the revisionist prefer....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... its reasons by itself and giving of reasons has always been insisted upon as one of the fundamentals of sound administration justice - delivery system, to make known that there had been proper and due application of mind to the issue before the Court and also as an essential requisite of principles of natural justice. The giving of reasons for a decision is an essential attribute of judicial and judicious disposal of a matter before Courts, and which is the only indication to know about the manner and quality of exercise undertaken, as also the fact that the Court concerned had really applied its mind. " [Vide State of Orissa Vs. Dhaniram Luhar (JT 2004(2) SC 172 and State of Rajasthan Vs. Sohan Lal & Ors. JT 2004 (5) SCC 338:2004 (5) SCC 573]. 32. Reason is the heartbeat of every conclusion. It introduces clarity in an order and without the same, it becomes lifeless. Reasons substitute subjectivity by objectivity. Absence of reasons renders the order indefensible/unsustainable particularly when the order is subject to further challenge before a higher forum. [Vide Raj Kishore Jha Vs. State of Bihar & Ors. AIR 2003 SC 4664; Vishnu Dev Sharma Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors. (20....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....istrative orders Lord Denning, M.R. In Breen v. Amalgamated Engg. Union, (1971)2 QB 175, observed:(QB p.191 C) "The giving of reasons is one of the fundamentals of good administration." In Alexander Machinery (Dudley) Ltd. v. Crabtree it was observed: "Failure to give reasons amounts to denial of justice." "Reasons are live links between the mind of the decision-taker to the controversy in question and the decision or conclusion arrived at." Reasons substitute subjectivity by objectivity. The emphasis on recording reasons is that if the decision reveals the "inscrutable face of the sphinx", it can, by its silence, render it virtually impossible for the Courts to perform their appellate function or exercise the power of judicial review in adjudging the validity of the decision. Right to reason is an indispensable part of a sound judicial system; reasons at least sufficient to indicate an application of mind to the matter before Court. Another rationale is that the affected party can know why the decision has gone against him. One of the salutary requirements of natural justice is spelling out reasons for the order made; in other words, a speaking-out. The "inscrutable face of the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s not.' 16. The Court cannot lose sight of the fact that a losing litigant has a cause to plead and a right to challenge the order if it is adverse to him. Opinion of the Court alone can explain the cause which led to passing of the final order. Whether an argument was rejected validly or otherwise, reasoning of the order alone can show. To evaluate the submissions is obligation of the Court and to know the reasons for rejection of its contention is a legitimate expectation on the part of the litigant. 17. It will be useful to refer words of Justice Roslyn Atkinson, Supreme Court of Queensland, at AIJA Conference at Brisbane on 13- 9-2002 in relation to Judgment Writing. Describing that some judgment could be complex, in distinction to routine judgments, where one requires deeper thoughts, and the other could be disposed of easily but in either cases, reasons they must have. While speaking about purpose of the judgment, she said, 'The first matter to consider is the purpose of the judgment. To my mind there are four purposes for any judgment that is written:- (1) to clarify your own thoughts; (2) to explain your decision to the parties; (3) to communicate the reason....