9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (5) TMI 1404X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ts and the Supreme Court as the case may be, where the duty amount involved is below the minimum threshold limits respectively prescribed in such circulars. In the present cases, we are concerned with the CBIC s latest circular dated 02.11.2023, wherein it has been specifically prescribed that no appeal shall be filed before the CESTAT below the monetary limit of Rs. 50 lakhs and if already filed, will have to be withdrawn. These instructions have been issued in exercise of its power under Section 131BA of the Customs Act, 1962. The perusal of the circular cited supra shows that the same prescribes monetary limit below which the department shall not file appeal before the CESTAT, the High Courts and the Supreme Court. In so far as, the CESTAT is concerned the monetary limit prescribed is Rs. 50 lakhs. Para 3 of the said circular prescribes that in respect of the pending cases before the CESTAT, the High Courts and the Supreme Court which are below the monetary limits, process of withdrawal of the appeal would be undertaken by the department. Further, we find that the present appeals do fall within the instructions as prescribed in the circular dated 02.11.2023. We also note that th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ancement and gave in writing the acceptance of re-assessed value on the ground that the value declared by them was lower than the value at which identical/similar goods were being imported at the same time in comparable quantity at other ports of the country. Thereafter, the importer challenged the said re-assessment and filed appeals before the Commissioner (Appeals), who vide the impugned order set aside the assessment order on enhanced value and allowed the appeals of the assessee with a direction to re-assess the bill of entry at declared value with consequential relief on the ground that an assessee cannot be precluded from challenging the enhancement by way of appeal, even if he has accepted the enhancement. Further, the Commissioner (Appeals) by resorting to Section 14 (1) of the Customs Act, 1962 read with Rule 3 of the Customs Valuation Rules, 2007, came to the conclusion that the assessing officer has not followed the said rules and various decisions on this issue before rejecting the declared value and subsequently enhancing the declared value. The Revenue has placed various grounds of appeals to challenge the impugned order. 3. Heard both the parties and perused the ma ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Rule is under challenge. ii) Where Notification/Instruction/Order/Circular has been held illegal or ultra vires. iii) Classification and refund issues which are of legal and/or recurring nature. Further, paragraph 3 of the instructions dated 02.11 2023 requires withdrawal of all pending cases, before the CESTAT, the High Courts and the Supreme Court which are below the monetary limit prescribed therein. 4.5 The learned Counsel for the respondent further submits that the CBIC's instructions dated 02.11.2023 are binding on the department because the said instructions have been issued under Section 131BA of the Customs Act, 1962. Section 131BA of the Act empowers the Board to issue instructions fixing monetary limits for the purpose of regulating the filing of appeal. Relevant extract of Section 131BA of the Act is reproduced herein below: "131BA : Appeal not to be filed in certain cases. (1) The Board may, from time to time, issue orders or instructions or directions fixing such monetary limits, as it may deem fit, for the purposes of regulating the filing of appeal, application, revision or reference by the Principal Commissioner of Customs or Commissioner of Cust ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Section 131BA of the Customs Act, 1962 wherein Board has been empowered to issue instructions for the purposes of regulating the filing of appeal. The rulings of the Courts pronounced in respect of the instructions issued under section 151A of the Act for the purpose of uniformity in the classification of goods or with respect to the levy of duty thereon or for the implementation of any other provisions of this Act or any other law, has wrongly been referred to and relied upon in the said decision. (b) The decision rendered is prima-facie per incuriam due to its failure to consider and apply the authoritative ruling of the Hon'ble Jammu & Kashmir High Court in the case of CCE & CGST, Jammu vs. M/s Narbada Industries - CEA No. 10 of 2020 (J&K High Court). (c) The Hon'ble Jammu & Kashmir High Court while interpreting the National Litigation Policy and specifically the phrase "monetary limits below which appeal shall not be filed", in its aforementioned pronouncement lucidly elucidated that the said phrase pertains to the monetary threshold of a singular appeal, rather than the aggregate amount of multiple appeals. This interpretation is founded on the fundame ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y considered the submissions made by both the parties and perused material on record; and also gone through the various decisions relied upon by both the sides. We find that for reduction of litigation, the CBIC has issued circulars/instructions from time to time instructing the department not to file the appeal and in some cases, if it has already filed, not to press the appeal before higher authorities i.e. the CESTAT, the High Courts and the Supreme Court as the case may be, where the duty amount involved is below the minimum threshold limits respectively prescribed in such circulars. In the present cases, we are concerned with the CBIC's latest circular dated 02.11.2023, wherein it has been specifically prescribed that no appeal shall be filed before the CESTAT below the monetary limit of Rs. 50 lakhs and if already filed, will have to be withdrawn. These instructions have been issued in exercise of its power under Section 131BA of the Customs Act, 1962. The perusal of the circular cited supra shows that the same prescribes monetary limit below which the department shall not file appeal before the CESTAT, the High Courts and the Supreme Court. In so far as, the CESTAT is concer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of below 15/20 lakhs. The above provisions and instructions/circulars therefore covers the case of disposal of these appeals on the same ground. The learned Counsel appearing for the respondents has no objection for such disposal. We are, therefore, inclined to do so. 7. However, it is made clear that in view of the specific provision of Section 131BA(2) as reproduced and emphasized above it is necessary to observe that once the appeals are disposed of in view of the above circumstances, based upon such circulars/instructions "it shall not preclude such Commissioner of Customs from filing any appeal, application, revision or reference in any other case involving the same or similar issues or questions of law." Further, in the case of CC Vs. FJM Cylinders Pvt Ltd - 2024 (2) TMI 1325 Delhi High Court, the Hon'ble Delhi High Court has observed in para 2, 3 & 4 as under: "2. Subject Appeal is covered by notification dated 2.11.2023 read with notification dated 17.08.2011 issued by the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Custom on the subject "Reduction of Government litigation-providing monetary limit for filing appeals by departments before CESTAT/High Court/Supreme Cour ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ven by the department. On that account also the expression „clearing and forwarding agent' have to be interpreted in the light of the circular." Similarly, the Hon'ble High Court of Punjab & Haryana in the case of Ambuja Cements Ltd vs. Union of India - 2009 (236) ELT 431 (P&H) has held in para 9 & 10 as under: 9. It is well settled that the circulars issued by the Board are binding and aims at adoption of uniform products. In that regard reliance has been rightly placed on the judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of Paper Products Ltd. (supra) and such circulars are binding on the department. Placing reliance on earlier judgments of the Supreme Court in the cases of CCE v. Usha Martin Industries, 1997 (94) E.L.T. 460 (S.C.) = (1997) 7 SCC 47; Ranadey Micronutrients v. CCE, 1996 (87) E.L.T. 19 (S.C.) = (1996) 10 SCC 387; CCE v. Jayant Dalal (P) Ltd., 1996 (88) E.L.T. 638 (S.C.) = (1997) 10 SCC 402 and CCE v. Kores (India) Ltd., 1997 (89) E.L.T. 441 (S.C.) = (1997) 10 SCC 338, Hon'ble the Supreme Court concluded in para 5 as under :- "5. It is clear from the abovesaid pronouncements of this Court that, apart from the fact that the Circulars issued by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
