9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (2) TMI 656 - AT - CustomsMonetary limit involved in appeal - Held that - As per the Board s Circular F.No.390/Misc./163/2010-JC dated 17/8/2011 as amended by Circular F. No. 390/Misc./163/2010-JC dated 17.12.2015 on Government s litigation, the Revenue is barred from filing appeal before this Tribunal, if the amount of duty or penalty or interest involved is not in excess ₹ 10 lacs unless the case involves classification, refund, or a matter of legal and recurring nature. The amount involved in this case is not in excess of ₹ 10 lakhs - the appeal is dismissed as per the above referred Government s litigation policy.
Issues: Jurisdiction of Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Mumbai over appeal against Order-in-Original No. 108/2009.C.C (Imp), JNCH dated 26.05.2009
Analysis: The appeal before the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Mumbai was filed by the department against Order-in-Original No. 108/2009.C.C (Imp), JNCH dated 26.05.2009. The Tribunal heard arguments from both sides, with Shri S.R. Nair representing the department and Shri D.H. Nadkarni appearing for the respondent-assessee. It was noted that the amount involved in the case did not exceed ?10 lakhs, leading to a consideration of the Government's litigation policy for disposal of such appeals. The Tribunal referred to the Board's Circular F.No.390/Misc./163/2010-JC dated 17/8/2011, as amended by Circular F. No. 390/Misc./163/2010-JC dated 17.12.2015, regarding the Government's litigation policy. As per the Circular, the Revenue is restricted from filing an appeal before the Tribunal if the amount of duty, penalty, or interest involved is not more than ?10 lakhs, unless the case pertains to classification, refund, or a legal and recurring matter. In the present case, none of these aspects were found to be applicable. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed in line with the Government's litigation policy without delving into the substantive merits of the case. The judgment was delivered by Mr. Justice (Dr.) Satish Chandra, President, and Mr. C.J. Mathew, Member (Technical). The decision was based on the specific provisions outlined in the Circular and the nature of the case, ultimately leading to the dismissal of the appeal. The Tribunal's adherence to the Government's litigation policy in matters concerning the threshold amount for appeals ensured a streamlined approach to handling cases falling below the specified monetary limit, emphasizing efficiency and policy compliance in the adjudication process.
|
