9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (4) TMI 127X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... credit of service tax paid on services of Customs House Agent/port services is admissible to the manufacturers as 'input service tax credit' by overlooking statutory provision of Rule 2(l) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004?" 3. Therefore we have proceeded to decide this appeal. The learned counsel for the respondent has raised a preliminary objection that the appeal itself is not maintainable in view of smallness of amount as in this case the Cenvat Credit amount of Rs. 1,23,739/- is involved is same to the penalty to the extent of Rs. 1,23,739/-. 4. The Circular dated 20-10-2010 is extracted and reproduced hereinbelow : F.No. 390/Misc./163/2010-JC Ministry of Finance Department of Revenue Central Board of Excise & Customs &e ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lassification are filed under Section 35L(b) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and Section 130E(b) of the Customs Act, 1962. Such appeals are being filed after careful scrutiny by the Board and while examining, the amount involved is kept in mind. On all issues other than those relating to valuation and classification, SLPs are filed by the Board after obtaining the opinion of the ld. Law officer from the Ministry of Law. However, it may be mentioned that Board has issued instruction vide DOF No. 390/170/92-JC dated 13-1-1993 as modified by D.O. of even number dated 27-10-1993 advising the field formations that appeals should not be filed in the Supreme Court in cases where the duty involved is Rs. 5 Lakhs or less. The said instruction was is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... /order or Circular has been held illegal or ultra vires. (c) Where audit objection on the issue involved in a case has been accepted by the Department. 7. It may also be noted that, wherever it is decided not to file appeal in pursuance of these instructions, which are aimed solely at reducing government litigation, such cases shall not have any precedent value. In such cases, Commissioners should specifically record that "even though the decision is not acceptable, appeal is not being filed as the amount involved is less than the monetary limit prescribed by the Board." Further in such cases, there will be no presumption that the Department has acquiesced in the decision on the dispute issues in the case of same assessee or in case of an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... p; New Delhi 17th August 2011 INSTRUCTION Sub :- Reduction of Government litigation - providing monetary limits for filing appeals by the Department before CESTAT/High Courts and Supreme Court - Regarding 1. In exercise of the powers conferred by Section 35R of the Central Excise Act, 1944 made applicable to Service Tax vide Section 83 of the Finance Act, 1994 and Section 131BA of the Customs Act, 1962 the Central Board of Excise & Customs (hereinafter referred to as the Board) fixes the following monetary limits below which appeal shall not be filed in the Tribunal, High Court and the Supreme Court. Sr. No. Appellate Forum Monetary limit 1. CESTAT Rs. 5,00,000/- 2. HIGH COURTS Rs. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Several queries connected with application of monetary limits have been raised by the field formations which were considered by the Board and are being clarified as below :- Issues Clarifications (a) Whether duty involved mentioned in the instruction dated 20-10-2010 refers to duty outstanding to be collected or the total duty demanded for deciding the threshold limit prescribed therein. In a case where a part of the duty demanded is not disputed and is paid and the outstanding duty under dispute is less than the monetary limit prescribed by the Board, no appeal shall be filed. In other words, monetary limit shall apply on the disputed duty and not on the total duty demanded in a case. (b) Whether monetary limits would app ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Rs. 1,23,739/-. Learned Senior Standing Counsel for the appellant could not dispute the contents of the circulars and the monetary limits respectively fixed therein. The dispute that the appeal was filed on 25-8-2011 and was admitted on 18-4-2012. When the matter came up for admission, the circular had come into force. Therefore, we are of the considered view that the learned counsel for the appellant ought to have produced to the notice of this Court the Circular dated 17th August 2011 and if this circular had been brought to the notice of this Court the appeal would not have been admitted. It cannot be gainsaid that the Tribunal is bound by its own circular. 6. In our opinion, since in the instant appeal the amount of Cenvat credit invol ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
