The Commissioner Of Central Excise vs. M/S. 3G Consultants
Held
The Court held that the appeal filed by the Revenue was not maintainable due to the revised monetary limit for filing appeals. The instruction dated 11.07.2018, issued by the Central Board of Indirect Taxes & Customs, raised the monetary limit for filing appeals before High Courts to Rs. 50,00,000/-. The Revenue's counsel conceded that the tax effect in the present case was below this limit and that the case did not fall under any exceptions. Consequently, the Court allowed the appeal to be dismissed as withdrawn or not pressed. No costs were awarded. The ratio decidendi is that appeals filed by the Revenue that do not meet the revised monetary limits for litigation, and do not fall under specified exceptions, should be withdrawn or not pressed.
Facts
The Commissioner of Central Excise, Mysore Commissionerate, filed an appeal against an order dated 15/06/2016 passed by the CESTAT. The appeal was filed under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act. The appellant sought to set aside the CESTAT's order, direct the CESTAT to restore the appeal and rehear the matter, or pass any other appropriate order. The appeal was filed before the Karnataka High Court. The Revenue's counsel submitted that the appeal was no longer maintainable due to a revised monetary limit for filing appeals. The tax effect in the present case was stated to be less than the prescribed monetary limit of Rs. 50,00,000/-.
Key Issues
1. Whether the present appeal is maintainable before the High Court in light of the revised monetary limits for filing appeals by the Department, as per the instructions dated 11.07.2018 issued by the Central Board of Indirect Taxes & Customs. Contentions: Petitioner (Revenue): The appeal is not maintainable because the tax effect involved is less than the prescribed monetary limit of Rs. 50,00,000/- for High Court appeals. The case does not fall under any exception category mentioned in the notification dated 17.08.2011. Therefore, the appeal should be dismissed as withdrawn or not pressed. Respondent (M/s. 3G Consultants): No arguments were recorded for the respondent.
Sections Cited
Section 35G, Section 35R, Section 83
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
NO.20266/2016 PASSED IN MISC.ORDER NO.20266/2016 WITH A PRAYER TO (I) DECIDE THE SUBSTANTIAL QUESTIONS OF LAW IN FAOVUR OF THE APPELLANT BY ALLOWING THE APPEAL AND SETTING ASIDE THE MISC.
Date of Judgment 14.08.2018, C.E.A.No.69/2016 The Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. M/s. 3G Consultants,
2/6
ORDER NO.20266/2016 DATED 15.06.2016 IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY (ii) DIRECT THE CESTAT TO RESTORE THE APPEAL AND REHEAR THE MATTER AFRESH IN THE
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the Karnataka High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.