Commissioner, Central Excise And Customs vs. M/S.Rexon Strips LTD.

Held

The Court held that no further indulgence could be shown to the Appellant due to significant delays in taking limitation steps, filing a neat copy of Annexure-3, and filing a certified copy of the order under Annexure-1, spanning almost three years. Additionally, the Court noted that the tax effect in the appeal was below the monetary limit. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed. The ratio decidendi is that procedural compliance is mandatory, and prolonged non-compliance, coupled with a low tax effect, warrants dismissal without further leniency. The operative direction was the dismissal of the OTAPL.

Facts

The appeal, OTAPL No.7 of 2019, was filed by the Commissioner, Central Excise & Customs, Bhubaneswar-I Commissionerate (Appellant) against M/s. Rexon Strips Ltd. (Respondent). The judgment notes that for almost three years, limitation steps have not been taken, a neat copy of Annexure-3 has not been filed, and a certified copy of the order under Annexure-1 has not been filed. The judgment also states that the tax effect in this appeal is below the monetary limit.

Key Issues

The Court had to decide whether to grant further indulgence to the Appellant given the delays in filing necessary documents and the low tax effect. The primary issue is the dismissal of the appeal due to procedural lapses. The Appellant, represented by Mr. Ch. Satyajit Mishra, Sr. Standing Counsel for GST, Central Excise & Customs Department, appears to have failed to comply with procedural requirements. The judgment does not explicitly record arguments from the Respondent.