The Commissioner Of Customs And Central Excise, Hyd. vs. M/S Aryan Energy [P] LTD., Indaram Village
Facts
The Commissioner of Central Tax and Central Excise, Medchal GST Commissionerate (Appellant) filed an appeal before the High Court against an order of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT). The CESTAT's order was in appeal against an order in Original passed by the Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise, Hyderabad. The Respondent is M/s. Aryan Energy [P] Ltd. The appeal was filed under Section 35(G) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The specific tax period and the amount in dispute are not explicitly stated in the provided text. The procedural history involves the order in Original, the CESTAT's decision, and the present appeal before the High Court.
Held
The Court granted the Appellant's request to withdraw the appeal. The Court permitted the Appellant to withdraw the appeal as sought. The Court also granted liberty to the Appellant to file an application for restoration of the appeal if it is subsequently found that the subject matter falls within the exceptions mentioned in CBIC Circular No. 3 of 2018. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn. The Court explicitly stated that the question of law involved in this appeal will remain open. No costs were awarded. The operative direction was the dismissal of the appeal as withdrawn with liberty to seek restoration under specific circumstances.
Key Issues
1. Whether the Appellant is permitted to withdraw the appeal in light of CBIC Circular No. 3 of 2018 dated 06.04.2024, which mandates withdrawal of appeals where the tax effect is below Rs. 2,00,00,000/-? The Appellant, represented by the Senior Standing Counsel for CBIC, argued that the tax effect in the present appeal is below the threshold stipulated in CBIC Circular No. 3 of 2018. Therefore, the Appellant sought permission to withdraw the appeal. The Appellant also requested liberty to file an application for restoration of the appeal if it is later found that the subject matter falls within the exceptions mentioned in the Circular. The Respondent's arguments are not recorded in the judgment.
Sections Cited
Section 35(G)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD FRIDAY,THE TWENry SEVENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENry FOUR PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NAMAVARAPU RAJESHWAR RAO CENTRAL EXCISE APPEALS NO: 25 OF 2009 Between: The Commissioner of Central Tax and Central Excise, Medchal GST Commissionerate, Medchal GST Bhavan, Lakdikapul, Hyderabad ...APPELLANT AND M/s. ARYAN ENERGY [P] LTD., Rep.by its Managing Director, lndaram Washery, Near Forest Check Post, lndaram Village, Adilabad District. .,.RESPONDENT Appeal filed under Section 35(G) of the Central Excise Ac!,ffi62 against order of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunalilonal Bench, Bangalore in Final Order No. 624 I OB in Appeal No. ST/ 355 I 2006 dated 22-05' 2008 preferred against the order in Original No. 13 of 2006 dated 26-09-2006 on the file of the Commissioner of Customs andCentral Excise, Hyderabad - | Commissionerate, Central Revenue Building, L.B. Stadium Road, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad.
Counsel for the Appellant: SRl. DOMINIC FERNANDE, Senior Standing Counsel for CBIC.
Counsel for the Respondent: SRI A. SUDERSHAN REDDY The Court delivered the following
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 Telangana High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.