2018 (1) TMI 488 - HC - Central Excise

Monetary limit of filing appeal - Section 35R of the Central Excise Act 1944 - Held that - the Government in exercise of powers under Section 35R of the Act vide instructions issued on 17.12.2015 had fixed the monetary limits for filing the appeal before the CESTAT High Courts and the Supreme Court for reduction of Government litigation - It has been prescribed therein that below the prescribed monetary limits no appeal shall be filed in the Tribunal High Court and the Supreme Court. It was not disputed that the total tax effect involved in the appeal is Rs. 6, 16, 724/- under Section 142 of the 1962 Act and Rs. 1 lac on account of penalty imposed under Section 117 of the 1962 Act which is below the prescribed monetary limit - appeal dismissed.

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to order dated 28.10.2016 by the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal based on monetary limits set by the Central Board of Excise and Customs.

Analysis:
The appellant-Revenue challenged the order dated 28.10.2016 passed by the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) based on instructions issued by the Central Board of Excise and Customs, Department of Revenue, setting monetary limits for filing appeals. The Government had fixed monetary limits for appeals before CESTAT, High Courts, and the Supreme Court to reduce Government litigation. The Tribunal dismissed the appeal by the Revenue as the tax effect involved was below the prescribed monetary limit. The total tax effect in the appeal was below the limit, with confirmed demand for recovery and penalty imposed under the Customs Act, 1962. The Revenue attempted to justify the appeal by referring to exceptions mentioned in the instructions dated 17.08.2011. However, the Tribunal found that the case did not fall under any exception, leading to the dismissal of the appeal.

Conclusion:
The High Court upheld the Tribunal's decision to dismiss the Revenue's appeal based on the monetary limits set by the Central Board of Excise and Customs. The judgment emphasized the importance of adhering to the prescribed limits for filing appeals to reduce Government litigation. The case serves as a reminder for parties to carefully consider the monetary thresholds before pursuing appeals to higher forums.