Commissioner Of Central Excise Ahmedabad I vs. Ambica Fashion
Held
The Court granted the permission as prayed for by the appellant. The appeal was disposed of as withdrawn in light of the instruction dated July 11, 2018. The Court reasoned that the instruction, which sets a monetary limit of Rs. 50,00,000/- for filing appeals before the High Court and is retrospectively applicable to pending appeals, rendered the present appeal, with a tax effect of Rs. 21.68 lakhs, not maintainable. The ratio decidendi is that appeals below the prescribed monetary limit, as per the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs instructions, should be withdrawn. The Court also 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 be at liberty to seek revival of the appeal. No specific issue was left undecided.
Facts
The Commissioner of Central Excise, Ahmedabad I (the appellant) filed a Tax Appeal before the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad against Ambica Fashion (the respondent). The appeal concerned an amount of duty in dispute, stated to be Rs. 21.68 lakhs. The appellant's counsel placed on record a communication from the Assistant Commissioner (Legal), CGST, Ahmedabad, advising withdrawal of the appeal. This advice was based on an instruction dated July 11, 2018, issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs. This instruction stipulated that no appeal where the tax effect does not exceed Rs. 50,00,000/- shall be filed before the High Court and was made retrospectively applicable to pending appeals. The appellant's counsel sought permission to withdraw the appeal in light of this instruction.
Key Issues
1. Whether the present appeal, involving a tax effect of Rs. 21.68 lakhs, is maintainable before the High Court in light of the Instruction F. No.390/Misc./116/2017-JC dated 11th July 2018, which sets a monetary limit of Rs. 50,00,000/- for filing appeals before the High Court and is retrospectively applicable to pending appeals? The petitioner (appellant) argued that the appeal should be withdrawn as the tax effect is below the prescribed monetary limit in the aforementioned instruction, which is applicable to pending appeals. The revenue (appellant) relied on the instruction dated July 11, 2018, to justify the withdrawal. The judgment does not record any arguments from the respondent (opponent).
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORAL ORDER (PER : HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE HARSHA DEVANI)
Ms. Vacha J. Nanavati, learned junior standing counsel for the appellant has placed on record a communication dated 18.7.2019 issued by the Assistant Commissioner (Legal), CGST, Ahmedabad informing the learned counsel to take appropriate necessary action for withdrawal of the appeal in view of the fact that the amount of duty involved in the present case is Rs.21.68 lakhs which is less than the monetary limit prescribed under Instruction F. No.390/Misc./116/2017-JC dated 11
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 Gujarat High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.