Commissioner Of Central Excise, Nashik vs M/S. Vasant Dada Patil Ssk Ltd
- CitationAppeal No. E/3275/06 &
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The Tribunal's dismissal of the Revenue's appeal, without examining the merits, rests on the following principle: where the amount in dispute is less than the monetary threshold fixed by the Government's litigation policy (here, Rs. 5,00,000), the appeal is to be dismissed on that ground alone, in accordance with the Board's instruction read with the High Court decisions cited, without going into the merits of the case.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
(Arising out Order-in-Appeal No. CEX/AKD/225 /NSK/APL/2006 dated 04.09.2006 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Nashik)
For approval and signature: Honble Shri P.K. Jain, Member (Technical) Honble Shri S.S.Garg, Member (Judicial)
1. Whether Press Reporters may be allowed to see the Order for publication as per Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982? : No 2. Whether it should be released under Rule 27 of CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 for publication in any authoritative report or not? : Yes 3. Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the Order? : Seen 4. Whether Order is to be circulated to the Departmental authorities? : Yes
Commissioner of Central Excise, Nashik Appellant
Vs.
M/s. Vasant Dada Patil SSK Ltd. Respondent
Appearance:
Shri H.M. Dixit, AC (AR) for the appellant None for the respondent
CORAM:
Honble Shri P.K. Jain, Member (Technical) Honble Shri S.S. Garg, Member (Judicial)
Date of hearing : 19.08.2015 Date of decision : 19.08.2015
O R D E R No:..
Per: P.K. Jain:
The appeal is filed by the Revenue. The amount involved is less than `5,00,000/-.
2. Keeping in view the fact that the amount involved is less than `5,00,000/- and as per the litigation policy of the Government vide Boards letter F.No. 390/Misc./163/2010-JC dated 17/08/2011 read with Honble Gujarat High Courts judgments in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Surat-I vs. Shreenath Fabrics reported in 2014 (303) ELT 540 (Guj.) and in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Vadodara-I vs. Pharmanza Herbal Pvt. Ltd. reported in 2014 (306) ELT 153 (Guj.) and the judgment of the Honble Karnataka High Court in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Bangalore-III vs. Presscom Products reported in 2011 (268) ELT 344 (Kar.), the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed without going into the merits of the case. Cross objections is also disposed of.
(Operative part pronounced in Court)
(S. S. Garg) (P.K. Jain) Member (Judicial) Member (Technical)
//SR
2
E/3215/06
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