Cce, Aurangabad vs Bhagwat Tukaram Pitale

Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal10 July 2015

CitationAPPEAL No. ST/109 to 111-Mum

Ratio decidendi

The rule this decision rests on

The Tribunal may dismiss a Revenue appeal where the amount involved is below the monetary threshold fixed by the Board's circular for filing appeals before the Tribunal, leaving the underlying question open for decision in an appropriate case.

Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.

Judgment

As delivered

-IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,WEST ZONAL BENCH AT MUMBAI

COURT No.I

APPEAL No. ST/109 to 111-Mum ST/CO/121 to 123/12-Mum

(Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No. AGS/ (309-310/216, 39/2010, AGS/311-12/223, 41/2010 & AGS/(313-314)/224, 40/2010 dated 26/11/2010 passed by the Commissioner of Customs & Central Excise (Appeals), Aurangabad.)

For approval and signature:

Honble Mr.M.V. Ravindran, Member (Judicial) Honble Mr. Raju, Member (Technical)

1. Whether Press Reporters may be allowed to see :No the Order for publication as per Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982? 2. Whether it should be released under Rule 27 of the :No CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 for publication in any authoritative report or not?

3. Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy :Seen of the Order?

4. Whether Order is to be circulated to the Departmental :Yes authorities? ========================================

CCE, AURANGABAD Appellant Vs. Bhagwat Tukaram Pitale Respondent Namdeo Pandurang Gawali Balaji Sopan Bithubane

Appearance: Shri. R.K. Das, Dc (AR) for appellant None for Respondent CORAM:

Honble Mr. M.V. Ravindran, Member (Judicial) Honble Mr. Raju, Member (Technical)

Date of Hearing : 10/07/2015 Date of Decision : 10/07/2015

ORDER NO

Per: M.V. Ravindran

1. These appeals are filed by the Revenue.

2. Since all the appeals raise the same question, they are being disposed by a common order. After hearing the departmental representative and perusal of records, we find that the amount involved in these cases is less than Rs. Five lacks. As per the CBEC Circular No. 390/MISC./163/2010-GC dated 27th August 2011, monetary limit of Rs. Five lacks is fixed, for filing the appeal to the Tribunal.

3. Since the amount is less than threshold limit, I dismiss all the appeals keeping the issue involved open for deciding in an appropriate manner.

4. Appeals are dismissed & Cross objectors are also disposed of.

(Dictated in Court)

(Raju) (M.V. Ravindran) Member (Technical) Member (Judicial)

akp

This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.

Research this judgment with Miss Lucy

Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.

Try Miss Lucy free