2026 (8) TMI 1451

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... When the matter is taken up for hearing, learned advocate Mr. Paresh Dave for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners would be pressing for Prayer No.18(B) only. The same is as under :- "18(B) That Your Lordships maybe pleased to issue a Writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction quashing and setting aside order No.11375-11376/2018 dated 9.7.2018 passed by the Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad on Appeal Nos. E/11007 and 11008/2018-SMC thereby directing the Appellate Tribunal to decide these two appeals on merits of the case;" 2. While pointing out the decision dated 09.07.2018 passed by the Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad (for short 'the Tribunal') it is submitted th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ners favour and the other two were against the petitioners. Both, the Revenue and the petitioners filed appeals before the Commissioner (Appeals). The Appeals filed by the Revenue were allowed. Thus, four Appeals were taken up together for hearing by the Commissioner (Appeals) who passed a common Order-in-Original dated 13.12.2017 and allowed both the Appeals filed by the Revenue whereas one of the Appeals filed by the petitioners involving issue of courier service came to be allowed but the other Appeal of the petitioners relating to civil construction work services came to be rejected. 6. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid Appellate orders the petitioners filed two Appeals before the Tribunal against two demands. The Tribunal by the orde....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....*** **** (ii) the amount of fine or penalty determined by such order, does not exceed two lakhs rupees." 8. Thus, by construing the aforesaid provision the Tribunal in its wisdom decided to dismiss the Appeal as being not maintainable on the ground of monetary limits by recording that the Tribunal has discretion not to admit the Appeal if the amount involved is less than Rs.2 lakhs. 9. In our opinion, the Tribunal has misconstrued the provision and rejected the Appeals by passing the aforesaid order without assigning any reasons on merits of the Appeal filed by the petitioner. It is settled legal precedent that assigning reasons by a quasi-judicial authority and the statutory judicial forum is the heart and soul of the legal ....