Commissioner Of Cen GST Commissionerate vs. Mangalam Cement LTD

Held

The Court held that in view of the Circular dated 11.07.2018, the appeal stands dismissed as not pressed. The reasoning is directly based on the instructions within the circular, which sets revised monetary limits for filing appeals by the Department. The circular specifies that appeals below ₹50,00,000/- should not be filed before High Courts. While the specific amount in dispute for this appeal is not mentioned, the court's decision to dismiss it as 'not pressed' in light of the circular implies that the appeal either fell below the revised monetary limit or the department chose not to pursue it based on the new policy. The ratio decidendi is that departmental appeals are subject to revised monetary limits set by the CBIC, and appeals not meeting these revised thresholds, or those the department chooses not to press due to these limits, will be dismissed as not pressed. The appellant was granted liberty to revive the appeal in case of difficulty.

Facts

The appellant, Commissioner, Central GST Commissionerate, Udaipur, filed an appeal against Mangalam Cement Ltd. The appeal was filed before the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan, Bench at Jaipur. The specific tax period(s) and the amount in dispute are not explicitly stated in the provided text. The procedural history leading to this appeal is not detailed, other than it being an appeal filed by the Revenue.

Key Issues

1. Whether the appeal filed by the appellant is maintainable in light of the Circular dated 11.07.2018 issued by the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC) regarding the reduction of monetary limits for filing appeals. Contentions: Petitioner/Appellant (Revenue): The appellant relied on the Circular dated 11.07.2018, which stipulated revised monetary limits for filing appeals before various forums, including High Courts. The circular indicated that appeals below ₹50,00,000/- should not be filed. The appellant's submission implicitly suggests that the current appeal might fall below this revised threshold or that the department has decided not to press appeals below a certain monetary limit as per the circular. Respondent (Mangalam Cement Ltd.): The respondent's arguments are not recorded in the provided judgment text.