Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + HC Central Excise - 2019 (7) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (7) TMI 1346 - HC - Central ExciseMaintainability of appeal - monetary limit involved in the appeal - prayer for withdrawal of appeal - HELD THAT - The appellant admits that in view of instructions dated 11.7.2018 issued by Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (Judicial Cell) the instant appeal is not maintainable before this Court, the monetary limit being below ₹ 50,00,000/-. Appeal dismissed as withdrawn.
Issues:
Delay in refiling the appeal, Setting aside of the demand, Setting aside of interest, Setting aside of penalties, Monetary limit for appeal. Delay in refiling the appeal: The appellant sought condonation of an 818-day delay in refiling the appeal, which was allowed by the court based on the reasons stated in the application. Setting aside of the demand: The appeal was against an order passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal setting aside the demand of ?21,32,778 equivalent to Cenvat credit taken by the company on inputs. The substantial question of law raised was whether the tribunal was correct in setting aside the demand by wrongly relying on a specific judgment. Setting aside of interest: The tribunal also set aside the interest on the balance amount recoverable from the company. The question raised was whether the tribunal was correct in doing so by relying on a particular judgment. Setting aside of penalties: Penalties imposed on the company and two individuals were set aside by the tribunal. The question raised was whether the tribunal was correct in setting aside these penalties under the Central Excise Rules, 2002. Monetary limit for appeal: During the hearing, it was admitted that the appeal was not maintainable before the court due to a monetary limit set by the Ministry of Finance. The appellant requested withdrawal of the appeal, which was dismissed as withdrawn, but the question of law raised was to remain open for future consideration.
|