Commissioner Of Central Excise, Pune-I vs M/S. Roplas(I) Ltd

Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal28 April 2015

CitationAPPEAL NO. E/1255/05-MUM

Ratio decidendi

The rule this decision rests on

The appeal is dismissed without examining the merits, because the duty involved is less than Rs. Five Lakhs and, under the Government Litigation Policy (F. No. 390/MISC/163/2010/JC dated 17/8/2011), read with the High Court decisions the Tribunal relies on, departmental appeals concerning duty below that threshold are not to be pursued on merits.

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

Judgment

As delivered

IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNALWEST ZONAL BENCH AT MUMBAICOURT NO. IIAPPEAL NO. E/1255/05-MUM

[Arising out of Order-in- Appeal No. PI/74/05 dtd. 1/2/2005 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) of Central Excise , Pune-I]

For approval and signature:

Honble Mr. P.K. Jain, Member(Technical) Honble Mr Ramesh Nair, 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 :

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 of Central Excise, Pune-I :

Appellants

M/s. Roplas(I) Ltd. :

Respondent

Appearance

Shri. H.M. Dixit, Asstt. Commissioner(A.R.) for the Appellants None for the Respondent

CORAM:

Honble Mr. P.K. Jain, Member (Technical) Honble Mr. Ramesh Nair, Member (Judicial)

Date of hearing: 28/4/2015 Date of decision 28/4/2015

ORDER NO.

Per : P.K. Jain

This is Revenues Appeal against order passed by the Commissioner(Appeals). We note that the duty amount involved is less than Rs. Five Lakhs and in view of the Government Litigation Policy Vide F. No. 390/MISC/163/2010/JC dated 17/8/2011 read with Honble High Court of Karnataka judgment in the case of Commissioner of C. Ex., Bangalore-III V/s. Presscom Products [2011(268) E.L.T. 344(Kar)] and Honble High Court Gujarat judgments- Commissioner of C. Ex. & Cus., Surat-I V/s. Shreenath Fabrics [2014 (303) E.L.T. 540(Guj)] and Commr. of C.Ex. & Cus., Vadodara-I V/s. Pharmanza Herbal Pvt. Ltd[2014(306)E.L.T. 153(Guj)] the appeal is dismissed without going into merit of the issue.

(Dictated in court)

Ramesh Nair Member (Judicial) P.K. Jain Member (Technical)

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