2016 (10) TMI 789 - AT - Central Excise

Maintainability of appeal - duty amount involved in the case is Rs. 15, 000/- - Tribunal has discretion either to refuse or to admit the appeal under Second proviso to Section 35B of Central Excise Act 1944 - Held that - the impugned order was passed by the Commissioner(Appeals) under Section 35A which is specified under Clause (b) of sub-section (1) of Section 35B. In view of Second proviso to Section 35B (1) this Tribunal has discretion to refuse or to admit the appeal in respect of order referred to clause (b) or Clause (c) or clause (d) where amount of duty amount of fine or penalty determined by such order does not exceed 50, 000/-(before 6/8/2014) and 2 Lakhs (on or after 6/8/2014). As the amount involved is below threshold limit of 50, 000/- the appeal is dismissed.

Summary

Issues Involved:
- Applicability of Second proviso to Section 35B of Central Excise Act, 1944 on the penalty amount involved in the cases.

Analysis:
The judgment pertains to an appeal before the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai where the penalty amount involved in three cases was found to be Rs. 15,000. The Tribunal has the discretion under the Second proviso to Section 35B of the Central Excise Act, 1944 to either refuse or admit the appeal. This provision states that the Tribunal may refuse to admit an appeal where the amount of fine or penalty determined by the order does not exceed fifty thousand rupees. In the present case, the impugned order was passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) under Section 35A, falling under Clause (b) of sub-section (1) of Section 35B. The Tribunal, in exercising its discretion, refused to admit the appeal as the penalty amount was below the threshold limit of Rs. 50,000, without delving into the merits of the case.

This judgment highlights the importance of the threshold limit set by the Second proviso to Section 35B of the Central Excise Act, 1944 in determining the Tribunal's discretion to admit or refuse appeals. The Tribunal's decision to dismiss the appeals solely based on the penalty amount being below the prescribed limit underscores the statutory framework's significance in regulating the appellate process. By adhering to the legal provisions, the Tribunal ensures consistency and compliance with the prescribed thresholds, thereby streamlining the adjudicatory process and upholding the legislative intent behind the statutory provisions.