SIGN IN SUBSCRIBE

News Update

India received foreign remittance of USD 111 bn in 2022, says UNPitroda resigns as Chairman of Indian Overseas Congress over racist remarkGovt hosts workshop on improving Ease of Doing Business in Mining sectorI-T - Anything made taxable by rule-making authority u/s 17(2)(viii) should be 'perquisite' in form of 'fringe benefits or amenity': SCCus - Drawback - Revenue contends that appeal of exporter ought to have been dismissed by Tribunal as not maintainable since correct remedy was filing a revision application with Central government - Appeal disposed of: HCCus - CHA - AA has clearly brought out the modus adopted by the appellant and how he was a party to the entire under valuation exercise - Factual finding affirmed by Tribunal - No question of law arises for consideration: HCGST - Proper officer has not applied his mind while passing the order; confirmed demand by opining that reply is not satisfactory - Proper Officer is directed to withdraw all punitive actions taken against petitioner pursuant to impugned order: HCGST - Proper Officer had to at least consider the reply on merits and then form an opinion - Non-application of mind - Order set aside and matter remitted for re-adjudication: HCGST - Cancellation of registration for non-filing of returns - Suspension/revocation of license would be counterproductive and works against the interest of revenue - Pragmatic view needs to be taken to permit petitioner to carry on his business: HC86 flights of AI Express cancelled as crew goes on mass sick leaveTax Refund Conundrum - Odyssey of Legal MisstepsI-T- AO not barred from issuing more than one SCN; Fresh SCN seeking information is not without jurisdiction, more so where HC itself directed re-doing of assessment: HCMurthy launches Capacity Building on Design and Entrepreneurship programCash, liquor & drugs worth Rs 110 Cr seized from Jharkhand ahead of pollsI-T- Appeal before CIT(A) (NFAC) is rightly dismissed where it has been delayed by over one year without just & reasonable cause: ITATPoll-induced stress: 2 Bihar officials die of heart attack at polling boothsSixth Edition of Commandants' Conclave held in PuneSome Gujarat villages keep away from polls over unfulfilled demands from governmentRoof-hugging inflation nudges Argentina to print first lot of 10,000 notes of pesoInvestigation finds presence of ‘boys club’ strands of culture at American bank regulatorUS cancels licence to some firms found exporting materials to Huawei
 
ST - Review - mere signing on draft note mechanically does not constitute compliance with requirement of application of mind by CCs comprising Committee to twin requirements of decision making process namely, due consideration of material pertaining to order and desirability of preferring an appeal - issue no longer res integra: CESTAT

By TIOL News Service

NEW DELHI, OCT 30, 2013: THIS is a Revenue appeal filed with a delay of 6 days.

The respondent raised a preliminary objection that the appeal is misconceived since there is no application of mind by the Committee of Chief Commissioners in considering the draft review order recommending filling of the appeal before the Tribunal against the adjudication order inasmuch as -

++ The Chief Commissioner of Central Excise, Delhi Zone merely signed on the draft review note, prepared by the Inspector (Review) on 11.3.2013, countersigned by the Superintendent (Review) on 11.3.2013, the deputy Commissioner in Chief Commissioner's unit on 5.4.2013, and the Additional Commissioner in C.C. unit on 11.4.2013, on 15.4.2013.

++ Similarly, the Chief Commissioner, Central Excise, Chandigarh Zone on 26.4.2013 merely signed on the draft review note as prepared by sub-ordinate officers of his office.

The Bench found it apt to call for the original records pertaining to the above review file.

Thereafter the Bench made the following observation -

"…The record discloses that an elaborate note culminating in a recommendation for review was prepared by sub-ordinate officers of the Chief Commissioner, Delhi Zone and the Chief Commissioner, Delhi merely appended his signature without indicating even formal acceptance of the proposals recommending review and on the note similar exercise was replicated by the Chief Commissioner, Central Excise, Chandigarh Zone."

Holding that the principle in this area is no longer res integra inasmuch as it has been held in the case of C.C.E., Delhi I vs. Kundalia Industries - (2011-TIOL-930-HC-DEL-CX) & C.S.T., Delhi Vs. L.R. Sharma & Co. - (2013-TIOL-944-CESTAT-DEL) that mere signing on draft note mechanically does not constitute sufficient compliance with the requirement of application of mind by the Commissioners comprising the Committee, to the twin requirements of the decision making process namely, due consideration of the material pertaining to the adjudication/appellate order and the appropriateness/desirability of preferring an appeal, the CESTAT concluded that in the present appeal the decision to review and prefer an appeal, recorded by the Committee of Chief Commissioners, Delhi and Chandigarh does not measure up to the standards spelt out in the earlier judgment of the Tribunal.

In fine, the appeal was held as defective and accordingly rejected.

This is one more way in which the Revenue loses cases!

(See 2013-TIOL-1613-CESTAT-DEL)


POST YOUR COMMENTS
   

TIOL Tube Latest

TIOL Tube
Shri N K Singh, recipient of TIOL FISCAL HERITAGE AWARD 2023, delivering his acceptance speech at Fiscal Awards event held on April 6, 2024 at Taj Mahal Hotel, New Delhi.

TOP NEWS

AR not Afar by SK Rahman

VISION 360



Shri Ram Nath Kovind, Hon'ble 14th President of India, addressing the gathering at TIOL Special Awards event.

TII LATEST

TIOLCORPLAWS LATEST