The Commissioner Of CGST And Central Excise, Surat vs. M/S Ramsisaria Textiles PVT LTD

Held

The Court disposed of the appeal as not pressed. The reasoning was based on the submission made by the learned senior standing counsel for the appellant (Revenue). The counsel relied on Instruction F.No.390/Misc./116/2017/JC dated 22nd August 2019, which sets a monetary limit for filing appeals before the High Court and is applicable retrospectively. As the tax effect in the present appeal was stated to be below this limit, the appellant chose not to press the appeal. The Court noted that if there was any error in the computation of the tax effect or if the instruction was not applicable for any reason, the appellant would have the liberty to seek revival of the appeal. No specific finding was given on the merits of the tax dispute itself.

Facts

The Commissioner of CGST and Central Excise, Surat (the appellant/Revenue) filed a Tax Appeal before the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad against M/s Ramsisaria Textiles Pvt Ltd (the respondent/petitioner). The appeal concerned a tax effect that was stated to be less than Rs. 1,00,00,000/-. The appellant's counsel submitted that, in light of Instruction F.No.390/Misc./116/2017/JC dated 22nd August 2019, which mandates that no appeal with a tax effect not exceeding Rs. 1,00,00,000/- shall be filed before the High Court and which is applicable retrospectively to pending appeals, the present appeal should not be pressed. The appeal was filed in the year 2017.

Key Issues

1. Whether the present appeal, with a tax effect less than Rs. 1,00,00,000/-, is maintainable before the High Court in light of Instruction F.No.390/Misc./116/2017/JC dated 22nd August 2019. Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner (Revenue) argued that the tax effect involved in the appeal is less than Rs. 1,00,00,000/-. Relying on Instruction F.No.390/Misc./116/2017/JC dated 22nd August 2019, issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs, which stipulates that appeals with a tax effect not exceeding Rs. 1,00,00,000/- should not be filed before the High Court and that this instruction is retrospectively applicable to pending appeals, the petitioner submitted that they do not press the present appeal. Respondent's Contention: The judgment records no specific argument from the respondent.