Miss Lucy
← All judgments

Chandigarh vs M/S Amson Transformers

Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal22 January 2015

Ratio decidendi

The rule this decision rests on

Where the amount in dispute is below the monetary limit prescribed by the Board's circular for filing departmental appeals, the Revenue's appeal is to be dismissed without examining the merits, following the principle that the Revenue cannot appeal in cases below that limit.

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

Judgment

As delivered

CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,WEST BLOCK NO.II, R.K. PURAM, NEW DELHI-110066CIRCUIT BENCH AT CHANDIGARHAppeal No.E/2607/2006-EX(DB)

[Arising out of OIA No.535/CE/CHD/2006, dt.08.06.2006, passed by Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs (Appeals), Chandigarh]

Commissioner, Central Excise & Service Tax,

Chandigarh Appellant

Vs

M/s Amson Transformers Respondent

Represented by:

For Appellant : Shri Yashpal Sharma, Authorised Representative

For Respondent: Shri Ankur (Clerk of Advocate)

For approval and signature:

Mr. P.K. Das, Honble Member (Judicial)

Mr. P.S. Pruthi, Honble Member (Technical)

1. Whether Press Reporters may be allowed to see the No

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 of Seen

the order?

4. Whether order is to be circulated to the Departmental Yes

authorities?

CORAM:

MR. P.K. DAS, HONBLE MEMBER (JUDICIAL)

MR. P.S. PRUTHI, HONBLE MEMBER (TECHNICAL)

Date of Hearing/Decision:22.01.2015

Final Order No.51108/2015

Per: P.K. Das

1. After hearing the ld.Authorised Representative for the Revenue and on perusal of the records, we find that the Adjudicating authority dropped the proceedings initiated in the Show Cause Notice dt.31.12.2004, proposing demand of Central Excise duty of Rs.1,89,968.00 alongwith interest and penalty. Revenue filed the appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals). By the impugned order, the Commissioner (Appeals) also dismissed the appeal filed by the Revenue.

2. After considering the amount involved, which is less than monetary limit of Rs.5 lakhs as prescribed by the Board vide Circular No. F.No.390/Misc/163/2010-JC dated 17.8.2011 and the decision of the Honble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT Bangalore Vs Ranka & Ranka  2012 (284) ELT 185 (Kar.), where it is held that the Revenue would not file appeal beyond the monetary limit, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed without going into merit.

(Dictated & Pronounced in Court)

(P.S. Pruthi) (P.K. Das)

Member (Technical) Member (Judicial)

cbb

2

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