2019 (5) TMI 990 - AT - Customs

Monetary amount involved in the appeal - maintainability of appeal - HELD THAT - The disputed duty involved in these cases is below the monetary limit of ₹ 10 lakhs which has been notified by the Government vide Circular No.390/Misc./163/2010-JC(17-12-2015) dated 17th December, 2015 and F.No.390/Misc./116/2017-JC dated 04.04.2018 - Accordingly, the appeals are dismissed under litigation policy.

Summary

Issues:
Delay in filing appeals before the Tribunal, condonation of delay, appeals filed by Revenue against Order-in-Appeal, disputed duty below monetary limit, dismissal of appeals under litigation policy.

Delay in filing appeals before the Tribunal:
The judgment addresses the issue of condonation of a delay of 97 days in filing appeals before the Tribunal by the Revenue. The Miscellaneous Applications filed by the Revenue seeking condonation of the delay were allowed by the Tribunal after considering the reasons provided in the applications.

Appeals filed by Revenue against Order-in-Appeal:
The appeals were filed by the Revenue against a common Order-in-Appeal passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), Kolkata. The Tribunal noted that despite notice, none appeared on behalf of the Respondent-Assessee, and with the consent of the ld.A.R. for the Revenue, the appeals were taken up for final disposal.

Disputed duty below monetary limit:
Upon perusal of records, the Tribunal found that the disputed duty involved in the cases was below the monetary limit of ?10 lakhs, as notified by the Government through Circulars dated 17th December 2015 and 4th April 2018. Consequently, the appeals were dismissed under the litigation policy, and Stay Petitions were also disposed of accordingly.

This judgment highlights the Tribunal's decision to condone the delay in filing appeals by the Revenue, the dismissal of appeals due to the disputed duty being below the specified monetary limit, and the disposal of Stay Petitions. The Tribunal proceeded with final disposal of the appeals despite the absence of the Respondent-Assessee, emphasizing compliance with the litigation policy and relevant circulars issued by the Government.