Commissioner Of Customs, Central Excise And Service Tax vs. M/S. Badve Engineering LTD., Aurangabad
Held
The Court allowed the Civil Applications filed by the petitioner. The Court permitted the withdrawal of Central Excise Appeal No. 4 of 2017 and Central Excise Appeal No. 74 of 2015. The reasoning was based on the submissions made by the petitioner's counsel, Mr. Ladda, who referred to instructions dated July 11, 2018, indicating a monetary limit of Rs. 50 lakhs for appeals to be filed in the High Court. The Court found these submissions sufficient to grant the withdrawal. The appeals were disposed of accordingly. No specific issue was left undecided, as the court directly addressed the request for withdrawal.
Facts
The petitioner, the Commissioner of Customs, Central Excise & Service Tax (now Commissioner of Central GST and Central Excise), filed Civil Applications seeking permission to withdraw two appeals: Central Excise Appeal No. 4 of 2017 and Central Excise Appeal No. 74 of 2015. The petitioner's counsel, Mr. Ladda, referred to instructions dated July 11, 2018, which indicated a monetary limit of Rs. 50 lakhs for appeals to be presented in the High Court. In Central Excise Appeal No. 4 of 2017, the disputed dues involved differential interest of Rs. 2,37,587, penalty of Rs. 20,58,660, and other penalties. In Central Excise Appeal No. 74 of 2015, the disputed Cenvat Credit was Rs. 27,45,147, along with interest and a penalty of Rs. 13,72,574.
Key Issues
1. Whether the petitioner, the Commissioner of Customs, Central Excise & Service Tax, should be permitted to withdraw the appeals based on the revised monetary limits for High Court appeals, as per instructions dated July 11, 2018? The petitioner argued that in light of the instructions dated July 11, 2018, which set a monetary limit of Rs. 50 lakhs for appeals to be presented in the High Court, the appeals should be allowed to be withdrawn. The petitioner's counsel relied on these instructions to justify the withdrawal. The revenue did not present any arguments against the withdrawal.
Sections Cited
Section 70, Chapter V of the Finance Act, 1994, Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act, 1994, Rule 15(2) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
( 1 ) ca9799.18 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 9799 OF 2018 IN CENTRAL EXCISE APPEAL NO.4 OF 2017 Commissioner of Customs, Central Excise .. Petitioner & Service Tax (Now, Commissioner of Central GST and Central Excise) N5, Town Center, CIDCO, Aurangabad. Versus M/s. Aditya Enterprises .. Respondent 29, Tapari Market, Bajrang Chowk, N7, Aurangabad – 431 003. Mr.D.S.Ladda, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.D.A.Bide, Advocate for sole respondent. AND CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 9807 OF 2018 IN CENTRAL EXCISE APPEAL NO.74 OF 2015 Commissioner of Customs, Central Excise .. Petitioner & Service Tax (Now, Commissioner of Central GST and Central Excise) N5, Town Center, CIDCO, Aurangabad. Versus
( 2 ) ca9799.18 M/s. Badve Engineering Ltd. .. Respondent Unit No.V, Gut No.63 & 64 Aurangabad Ahmednagar Road, Near Waluj, Narayanpur, Gangapur, Aurangabad. Mr.D.S.Ladda, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.A.P.Kolhe, Advocate for sole respondent. CORAM : PRASANNA B.VARALE & S.M.GAVHANE, JJ. DATED : 30.07.2018 P.C. :
By way of present Civil Applications the applicant/appellant prayed for withdrawal of the appeal. M
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 Bombay High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.