Comnr.Of Cen.Excise vs. Sriram Re-Roller P.L

Held

The Court held that the appeal stands disposed of in view of the CBIC Circular dated July 11, 2018. The circular established a monetary limit of Rs. 50,00,000/- for filing appeals before the High Court. As the tax effect in the present appeal was less than Rs. 50 lac, the Department was instructed not to file appeals below this limit. The Court granted liberty to the Department to revive the appeal in case of difficulty. The reasoning is based on the Department's own instruction to reduce litigation by raising monetary thresholds for appeals. The ratio decidendi is that the Department is bound by its own circulars regarding monetary limits for appeals, and appeals filed below these limits are to be disposed of or withdrawn.

Facts

The appeal was filed by the Department against an order dated March 28, 2006, passed by the CESTAT, Kolkata. The tax effect in dispute was less than Rs. 50 lac. The Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC) issued a Circular on July 11, 2018, in exercise of its powers under Section 35R of the Central Excise Act, 1944, which was made applicable to Service Tax vide Section 83 of the Finance Act, 1994. This circular revised the monetary limits for filing appeals by the Department before various appellate forums, setting the limit for High Courts at Rs. 50,00,000/-. The circular applied to legacy issues and pending cases.

Key Issues

1. Whether the appeal filed by the Department is maintainable before the High Court given the revised monetary limits prescribed by the CBIC Circular dated July 11, 2018, specifically concerning the tax effect of Rs. 50,00,000/- for High Court appeals? (Question of law) Arguments: Petitioner/Appellant (Department): The Department relied on the CBIC Circular dated July 11, 2018, which stipulated that appeals shall not be filed before the High Court if the monetary limit is below Rs. 50,00,000/-. Since the tax effect in this case was less than Rs. 50 lac, the appeal should not have been filed or should be withdrawn. Revenue/State: No specific arguments were recorded for the Revenue/State in the judgment.