2016 (5) TMI 1431 - HC - Central Excise

Monetary amount involved in the appeal - circular dt.17/12/2015 bearing No. F.No.390/Misc./163/2010-JC - Held that - Taking note of the CBEC Circular dt.17/12/2015 & 01/01/2016, the monetary limits which indisputably in these appeals/reference is less than ₹ 15 lacs, much less than what has been prescribed for filing appeal before the High Courts, deserve to be dismissed as not pressed - appeal dismissed.

Summary

Issues:
1. Monetary limits for filing appeals by Revenue before CESTAT, High Courts, and Supreme Court.
2. Applicability of circulars issued by the Central Board of Excise & Customs regarding monetary limits.
3. Retrospective application of circulars to pending appeals in High Courts/CESTAT.
4. Dismissal of appeal due to the amount involved being less than the prescribed limit.

Analysis:
1. The judgment concerns the monetary limits set by the Central Board of Excise & Customs for filing appeals by the Revenue before different appellate forums. The circular dated 17/12/2015 specified limits of Rs. 10,00,000 for CESTAT, Rs. 15,00,000 for High Courts, and Rs. 25,00,000 for the Supreme Court. The judgment acknowledges the circular's intent to reduce litigation and align with similar directives from the Central Board of Direct Tax.

2. The judgment discusses a subsequent clarificatory circular issued on 01/01/2016, emphasizing the retrospective application of the monetary limits to all pending appeals in High Courts and CESTAT. The circular directs Principal Chief Commissioners/Chief Commissioners to take necessary action for cases falling below the new threshold limits, subject to conditions specified in earlier instructions.

3. The court notes that the prescribed monetary limits do not apply to certain exceptions as specified in the circular. However, it clarifies that appeals with amounts less than Rs. 15 lacs, as in the case at hand, should be dismissed as not pressed. The judgment leaves open the possibility of examining substantial legal questions raised in the appeals in future proceedings.

4. In light of the CBEC circulars, the court dismisses the appeal due to the amount involved being below the prescribed limit for filing appeals before the High Courts. It clarifies that while the circular specifically mentions appeals, references filed earlier should also be covered by its provisions. The Revenue is granted the liberty to move an application for recalling the order if the appeal falls within the exceptions outlined in the circular.

In conclusion, the judgment upholds the monetary limits set by the CBEC for filing appeals, dismisses the appeal due to the amount being below the prescribed limit, and allows for the examination of substantial legal questions in future proceedings if necessary.