Just a moment...

Report
FeedbackReport
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Feedback/Report an Error
Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  2. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  3. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  4. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  5. Text Search
  6. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  7. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  8. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 TMI Notes - Adv. Search
    Act Rules Bills
    Legislative Continuity and Change in Tax Treatment of Specified Articles : SCHEDULE-XIII of the Inco...
    Act Rules Bills
    Statutory Classification of Minerals under Indian Income Tax Law : SCHEDULE-XII of the Income Tax Bi...
    Act Rules Bills
    Modernising Provident, Superannuation, and Gratuity Fund Regulation and Taxation : SCHEDULE-XI of th...
    Act Rules Bills
    Practical Perspectives on Insurance Business Taxation in India : SCHEDULE-XIV of Income Tax Bill, 20...
    Act Rules Bills
    Transitional Powers and Executive Discretion in Indian Tax Statutes : Clause 535 of the Income Tax B...
    Act Rules Bills
    The Jurisprudence of Repeal and Savings in Indian Income Tax Law : Clause 536 of the Income Tax Bill...
    Act Rules Bills
    Legislative Scrutiny of Delegated Legislation in Indian Tax Law : Clause 534 of the Income Tax Bill,...
    Act Rules Bills
    Rule-Making Powers under Indian Income Tax Law : Clause 533 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Section...
    Act Rules Bills
    The Legal Evolution of Tax Exemptions for Union Territories : Clause 531 of the Income Tax Bill, 202...
    Act Rules Bills
    Evolution and Analysis of Interim Tax Charging Provisions : Clause 530 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 ...
    Act Rules Bills
    Evolution of Executive Scheme-Making Powers in Indian Income Tax Law : Clause 532 of the Income Tax ...
    Act Rules Bills
    Withdrawal of Statutory Approvals under Indian Income Tax Law : Clause 529 of the Income Tax Bill, 2...
    Act Rules Bills
    Legal Perspectives on Condonation of Delay in Income Tax Approvals : Clause 528 of Income Tax Bill, ...
    Act Rules Bills
    Executive Discretion and Tax Incentives in India's Mineral Oil Sector : Clause 527 of the Income Tax...
    Act Rules Bills
    Immunity and Jurisdictional Bar in Tax Administration : Clause 526 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. ...
    Act Rules Bills
    Authorisation and Assessment in Multi-Person Search Cases : Clause 525 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 ...
    Act Rules Bills
    Rebuttable Presumptions in Tax Searches : Clause 524 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Section 292C o...
    Act Rules Bills
    Deeming Service of Notice in Tax Proceedings Under Income Tax Law : Clause 523 of the Income Tax Bil...
    Act Rules Bills
    Technicalities vs. Substantive Justice : Clause 522 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Section 292B of...
    Act Rules Bills
    Exclusion of Probationary Relief for Tax Offenders : Clause 521 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Sec...

Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

NOTE:

Back

All TMI Notes

Showing Results for : Law : All
Reset Filters
Showing
Records
ExpandCollapse
    Back

    All TMI Notes

    Showing Results for : Law : AllReset Filters
    Case ID :

    Monetary Limits for Filing Appeals: Analyzing the CESTAT Judgment on Binding Nature of CBIC Instructions and Fair Hearing

    📋
    Contents
    Plus +
    Summary
    Note

    Note

    Note

    Bookmark

    print

    Print

    Deciphering Legal Judgments: A Comprehensive Analysis of Case Law

    Reported as:

    2024 (3) TMI 1245 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

    Introduction

    This article delves into a significant judgment delivered by the Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) concerning the monetary limits prescribed by the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC) for filing appeals by the Revenue Department. The judgment addresses the binding nature of CBIC instructions and the overarching principles of natural justice and fair opportunity to be heard.

    Arguments Presented

    Respondent's Contention

    The Learned Counsel for the Respondent-Assessee raised an objection that the amount involved in the present appeal was below the threshold limit required for filing appeals before the CESTAT, as per CBIC Instruction F. No. 390 dated 17.08.2011, amended on 30.12.2016. The Counsel requested directions to the Department to withdraw the impugned appeal in view of the aforementioned CBIC Instructions.

    Appellant's Rebuttal

    The Learned Authorized Representative for the Appellant contended that the Respondent-Assessee had filed a cross-objection without raising the objection of the Monetary Limit, and introducing a new issue at the hearing stage was impermissible. Additionally, the Representative argued that the issue of the monetary limit could not be considered a question of law and relied on the Supreme Court's decision in Lohiya Machines Limited vs. Collector.

    Furthermore, the Authorized Representative submitted that the total amount of duty involved in all the Bills of Entry pertaining to the same importer, Century Metal Recycling Private Limited, should be clubbed together, which would exceed the required threshold limit of Rs. 10 Lakhs.

    Discussions and Findings of the Court

    Binding Nature of CBIC Instructions

    The CESTAT observed that the CBIC instructions, issued u/s 151A of the Customs Act, represent the Board's understanding of statutory provisions and are binding on the authorities under the respective statutes. However, relying on various judicial precedents, the Tribunal held that while circulars and instructions are binding on departmental officers, they are not binding on courts and quasi-judicial authorities, including tribunals.

    Principles of Natural Justice and Fair Opportunity

    The CESTAT emphasized that tribunals and superior courts must prioritize the interests of justice, ensuring that no party is condemned unheard and that no prejudice is caused. The Tribunal held that it must examine whether any departmental circular or instruction is sufficient to fulfill the requisite interests of justice in the given circumstances.

    Violation of Statutory Mandate

    The Tribunal found that the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) under challenge was passed in violation of Section 128A(3)(b)(ii) of the Customs Act, 1962. The Commissioner (Appeals) had set aside the value enhanced by the proper officer after reassessing the value of the imported goods, accepting the self-assessed value declared by the importer-respondent, without remanding the matter back to the proper officer for a fresh decision, as mandated by the said provision.

    Analysis and Decision by the Appellate Tribunal

    Doctrine of Natural Justice

    The CESTAT emphasized the doctrine of natural justice, which requires a fair opportunity to be heard, even for government authorities and departments. The Tribunal held that the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) violated this principle by denying the Department the opportunity to defend its stance.

    Reliance on Precedents

    The Tribunal noted that the Commissioner (Appeals) had wrongly relied upon the decision in Sanjivani Non-ferros Trading Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs, Jaipur, as in that case, the enhancement was not u/s 17 of the Customs Act, 1962.

    Clubbing of Bills of Entry

    The CESTAT observed that instead of counting each Bill of Entry separately for calculating the monetary limit, all 30 Bills of Entry pertained to the same importer, Century Metal Recycling Private Limited, for the same commodity imported during the same period. Additionally, the Commissioner (Appeals) had passed a single Order-in-Appeal for all 57 Bills of Entry, against which the present appeal was filed before the CESTAT.

    Exercise of Power under CESTAT Procedure Rules

    Invoking Rule 6A of the CESTAT Procedure Rules, 1982, the Tribunal held that the present case warranted the exercise of its power to not accept the CBIC instructions prescribing the monetary limit for filing appeals before the CESTAT. Consequently, the Tribunal ruled that the Departmental Appeals shall be heard on merits.

    Summary:

    The CESTAT, in its comprehensive judgment, addressed the binding nature of CBIC instructions, emphasizing that while they are binding on departmental officers, they are not mandatory for tribunals and courts, which must prioritize the interests of justice and the principles of natural justice. The Tribunal found that the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) violated the statutory mandate and denied the Department a fair opportunity to be heard.

    Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the CESTAT exercised its power under the CESTAT Procedure Rules, 1982, and held that the CBIC Instruction prescribing the monetary limit for filing appeals before the CESTAT was not mandatory in the present case. The Tribunal directed that the Departmental Appeals shall be heard on merits.

     


    Full Text:

    2024 (3) TMI 1245 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

    Topics

    ActsIncome Tax