Commissioner, Central Excise & Service ... vs M/S Condor Footwear (India) Ltd
- CitationAppeal No.E/561/2007-DB
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The Revenue's appeal is rejected on the footing that the duty involved is below the monetary threshold fixed by the CBEC circular dated 17.08.2011, which bars Revenue appeals to the Tribunal where the amount in dispute is under Rs.5 lakhs; that circular is applied retrospectively, following the Karnataka High Court's decision in Presscom Products, so that the threshold governs appeals already pending on the date of issue.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
Appeal No.E/561/2007-DB [Arising out of OIA No.RS/66/SRT-I/2007, dt.28.02.2007, passed by Commissioner (Appeals), Central Excise & Service Tax, Surat-I]
Commissioner, Central Excise & Service Tax, Surat-I Appellant
Vs
M/s Condor Footwear (India) Ltd. Respondent
Represented by:
For Appellant: Shri T.K. Sikdar, Authorised Representative For Respondent: None
For approval and signature:
Honble Mr. P.K. Das, Member (Judicial) Honble Mr. P.M. Saleem, 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:
HONBLE MR. P.K. DAS, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) HONBLE MR. P.M. SALEEM, MEMBER (TECHNICAL)
Date of Hearing/Decision:02.06.2015
Order No. A/10731 / 2015 dt.02.06.2015
Per: P.K. Das
Revenue filed this appeal against the impugned order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals).
2. None appears on behalf of the Respondent. The learned Authorised Representative for the Revenue submits that the appeal involved a demand of duty of Rs.1,70,939.00 It is also noticed that CBEC Circular F.No.390/Misc./163/2010-JC, dt.17.08.2011 held that Revenue would not file appeal below Rs.5 lakhs before the Tribunal. Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of Commissioner of C.Ex., Bangalore-III Vs Presscom Products 2011 (268) ELT 344 (Kar.) observed that the said circular would be applicable retrospectively. Following the CBEC Circular dt.17.08.2011 (supra) and the decision of Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of Commissioner of C.Ex., Bangalore-III Vs Presscom Products (supra), the appeal filed by the Revenue is rejected as the amount involved is less than Rs.5 lakhs.
(Dictated & Pronounced in Court)
(P.M. Saleem) (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