Commissioner Of Central Excise vs. M/S Brahmaputra Carbon LTD.
Facts
The Revenue, represented by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Guwahati, filed an excise appeal against the respondent, M/s Brahmaputra Carbon Ltd. The appeal challenged two orders: one from the Commissioner (Appeals) dated 25.08.2011 and another from the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Kolkata, dated 02.11.2023. The Commissioner (Appeals) had partially modified an order by the Deputy Commissioner, Central Excise, Dhubri, directing a refund of ₹2,76,461/- to the respondent, in addition to other amounts previously allowed. The CESTAT dismissed the Revenue's appeal, citing the National Litigation Policy and the fact that the amount in dispute was below the monetary limit of ₹50,00,000/-.
Held
The Court held that the Revenue is not supposed to pursue the case as the amount involved is only ₹2,76,461/-, which is below the monetary limit stipulated by the National Litigation Policy. While acknowledging the Revenue's argument regarding a substantial question of law and the instructions dated 26.06.2024, the Court chose not to interfere with the impugned orders. The Court closed the excise appeal without deciding the substantial question of law, explicitly leaving it open for appropriate decision in an appropriate case. The ratio decidendi is that adherence to the National Litigation Policy's monetary limits generally prevails, even when a substantial question of law is raised, unless specific exceptions or overriding principles are invoked and accepted by the Court.
Key Issues
1. Whether the Revenue is barred from pursuing an appeal when the amount in dispute is below the monetary limit prescribed by the National Litigation Policy, despite the presence of a substantial question of law? (Question of law, turning on the interpretation and application of the National Litigation Policy and Board's Instructions). Contentions: Petitioner (Revenue): Argued that a substantial question of law is involved, and as per Government of India, Ministry of Finance instructions dated 26.06.2024, the Revenue can pursue appeals involving substantial questions of law, irrespective of the monetary limit. Respondent: No arguments recorded for the respondent.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Page No.# 1/2 GAHC010090272024
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : C.Ex.App./3/2024 COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, GUWAHATI, SETHI TRUST BUILDING, BHANGAGARH, GUWAHATI 781005. PRESENTLY PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER CGST AND CENTRAL EXCISE, GST BHAWAN, KEDAR ROAD, MACHKHOWA, GUWAHATI 781001 VERSUS M/S BRAHMAPUTRA CARBON LTD. INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, NEW BONGAIGAON, ASSAM 783380 For the Appellant(s) : Mr. S.C. Keyal, Standing Counsel, GST. For the Respondent(s) : – B E F O R E – HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. VIJAY BISHNOI HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUMAN SHYAM 16.08.2024 (Vijay Bishnoi, CJ) This excise appeal is preferred by the Revenue being aggrieved with the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) dated 25.08.2011 as well as the order dated 02.11.2023 passed by the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Kolkata in Excise Appeal No.942/2011. The Commissioner (Appeals), vide the impugned order dated 25.08.2011, has partially modified the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Central Excise, Dhubri and has ordered for refund of an amount of `
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 Gauhati High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.