2021 (8) TMI 37

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... GOL, ADVOCATE RESPONDENT: SRI. S. RAGHU, ADVOCATE JUDGMENT This appeal under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 is filed by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Customs and Service Tax, Mysuru challenging the order dated 30.11.2018 passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as 'CESTAT' for short), South Zonal Branch, Bengaluru in ap .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... t and the balance was paid on 12.08.2013 and interest of Rs. 9,153/- was paid on 10.10.2013. The Deputy Commissioner confirmed the demand and also imposed penalty of Rs. 5,000/- under Rule 27. Aggrieved by the aforesaid order of the Deputy Commissioner, the respondent filed appeal before the CESTAT. The CESTAT after considering the submissions of both the parties, relied upon its own decision in G .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... r Rule is under challenge. (b) Where Notification/Instruction/Order or Circular has been held illegal or ultra vires." 4. Since the Circular of CBDT dated 22.08.2019 fixed the monetary limit at a sum of Rs. 1 Crore to file an appeal, the present appeal which has a tax effect of Rs. 3,45,203/- is not maintainable. Moreover, there is no challenge to the constitutional validity of the Act or the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X