Commissioner Central Excise & Customs, ... vs M/S International Conveyors Ltd

Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal8 June 2015

CitationAppeal No. E/1021/10-Mum

Ratio decidendi

The rule this decision rests on

The appeal is dismissed because the tax amount involved is below the monetary threshold fixed by the CBEC circular for appeals to the Tribunal, so the Tribunal lacks occasion to decide the merits; the legal issue is expressly left open for 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 TRIBUNALWEST ZONAL BENCH AT MUMBAICOURT NO. IAppeal No. E/1021/10-Mum

[Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No. AGS(52)35/2010 dated 06.04.2010 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) Central Excise & Customs, Aurangabad].

For approval and signature:

Honble Shri M.V. Ravindran, Member (Judicial)

======================================================

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?

======================================================

Commissioner Central Excise & Customs, Aurangabad Appellant

Vs.

M/s International Conveyors Ltd. Respondent

Appearance:

Mr. H. M. Dixit, Asstt. Commr. (AR) for Appellant

Mr. Vikas V. Doiphode, Advocate for Respondent

CORAM:

HONBLE SHRI M.V. RAVINDRAN, MEMBER (JUDICIAL)

Date of Hearing: 08.06.2015

Date of Decision: 08.06.2015

ORDER NO.

Per: Shri M. V. Ravindran, Member (Judicial)

1. This appeal is filed by the revenue against impugned Order No. AGS(52)35/2010 dated 06.04.2010.

2. After hearing the departmental Representative and perusal of records, I find that the amount involved in this case is less than Rs. Five Lakhs. As per the CBEC Circular Number 390/MISC./163/2010-GC dated 27th August 2011, monetory limit of Rs. Five Lakhs is fixed, for filing the appeal to the Tribunal.

3. Since the amount is less than thresh hold limit, I dismiss this appeal, keeping the issue involved open for deciding in an appropriate matter.

4. Appeal is dismissed.

(Dictated in Court)

(M.V. Ravindran) Saifi Member (Judicial)

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