9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (7) TMI 882X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Respondent. JUDGMENT The present Tax Appeal is directed against order dated 14-7-2009 of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, West Zonal Branch, Ahmedabad [2000 (17) S.T.R. 168 (Tri. - Ahmd.)], rejecting the appeal of the Revenue. 2. The issue involved was in respect of refund of ₹ 38,890/- of accumulated Cenvat credit claimed by the respondent assessee under Rule 5 of the Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The justifiability of that claim was sought to be questioned by issuing show cause notice on 14-6-2007, which culminated into the order of rejection by the adjudicating authority. The issue was agitated in the appellate forums, and in the second round of the proceedings, the Tribunal ruled in favour of the assessee confirming the order of the Appellate Commissioner. That has brought the Revenue before this Court by way of present appeal. 2.1 By order dated 25-2-2010, the Court formulated following two questions for considerations. (i) Whether Hon ble CESTAT has committed an error in interpreting Rule 5 of Cenvat Credit Rules along with sub-rule 2(1) pertaining to definition of input service while interpreting words used in manufacture ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bay High Court in its order dated 21-6-2010 in the case of CCE v. Techno Economic Services Pvt. Ltd., [2010 (255) E.L.T. 526 (Bom.)] had desired that C.B.E. C. consider issuing circular, on the lines of circulars issued by the CBDT, so as to reduce litigations arising out of indirect tax litigations. 4. In respect of appeals filed in the Supreme Court, the proposals are examined by the Board before filing. The Civil Appeals on matters relating to valuation and classification are filed under Section 35L(b) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and Section J30E(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 DO F. No. 390/170/92-JC dated 13-1-93 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 ₹ 5 Lakhs or less. Th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n case any prior order is being cited on facts and law, it must be checked whether such order(s) were accepted only on account of the monetary limit before following them in the name of judicial discipline. 8. In respect of an order where it is decided not to file appeal in pursuance of these instructions, a data base needs to be created so that all the Commissionerates are made aware of the orders that are accepted solely on the ground that the revenue involved is below the threshold prescribed herein and which should not be taken as having precedent value. The details of such orders in respect of CESTAT and the High Courts is required to be furnished by the Zonal Chief Commissioners in Proforma enclosed (Annexure IIIE Annexure IIIF) which should form part of the Monthly Technical Report being sent to the Directorate of Legal Affairs for posting on the departmental website. These Annexures IIIE [email protected]. 9. The above instructions af the Board must be adhere to strictly for all appeals filed on or after 1-11-2010. 10. Instruction issued vide F. No. 275/55/CX 8A, dated 10-11-2008 is hereby rescinded. 11. Hindi version follows. 4.3 Similarly it is useful also ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... constitutional validity of the provisions of an Act or Rule is under challenge. (b) Where Notification/instruction/order or Circular has been held illegal or ultra vires . 4. 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 is 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 apply to cases of refund? It is clarified that the monetary limits being prescribed by the Board would apply to cases of refund as well. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
