Commissioner Of Central Excise & ... vs M/S Orion Ropes Pvt. Ltd

[Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No. AKP/56 & 57/NSK/2009 dated 09.09.2009 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Nasik].

For approval and signature:

Honble Shri 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 & Customs, Nasik Appellant

Vs.

M/s Orion Ropes Pvt. Ltd. Respondent

Appearance: Mr. Ashutosh Nath, Asstt. Commr. (AR) for Appellant

None for Respondent

CORAM: HONBLE SHRI RAMESH NAIR, MEMBER (JUDICIAL)

Date of Hearing: 14.05.2015

Date of Decision: 14.05.2015

ORDER NO.

Per: Shri Ramesh Nair

These two appeals filed by the Revenue involving duty of Rs.67,688/- and Rs.11,456/- each, which are less than Rs. Five Lakhs. In terms of Government Litigation Policy Vide F. No. 390/MISC/163/2010/JC dated 17.08.2011 Revenue is not supposed to file appeals against order of the Commissioner (Appeals) if amount involved is less than Rs. 5 Lakhs. As regard these appeals which are filed before the issuance of litigation policy dated 17.08.2011. The 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 Commissioner of C.Ex. & Cus., Vadodara-I V/s Pharmanza Herbal Pvt. Ltd. [2014(306) E.L.T. 153(Guj.)] has held that the monitory limit prescribed under circular shall also be applicable in the cases which were filed prior to issuance of Litigation of policy. Operative part of the Honable High Court orders are reproduced below:

Commissioner of C.Ex. Bangalore-III V/s Presscom Products [2011(268) E.L.T. 344(Kar.)] Appeals to Appellate Tribunal and High Court  National Litigation Policy  Appeal filed before monetary limits for such appeals was fixed by CBEC Circular, involving amounts below limits so fixed  HELD : Assessee could not be denied benefit of the CBEC Circular, even though substantial question of law involved in appeal was answered against them. [para 19]

Commissioner of C.Ex. & Cus., Surat-I V/s Shreenath Fabrics [2014(303) E.L.T. 540(Guj.)] Appeal by Department before High Court  Maintainability of considering monetary limit prescribed therefore vide Department circular  Amount involved in appeal filed by Department was less than 10 lakhs, which was the monetary limit fixed vide CBEC. Instruction F. No. 390/MISC/163/2010/JC dated 17.08.2011  Applicability of circular challenged on ground that appeal filed on 1.4.2011  However, when appeal came up for consideration, the circular was in force  Department being bound by its own circulars and instructions, held that the monetary limit applied and instant appeal dismissed solely on ground of such monetary limit  Rule 14 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004  Section 11A of Central Excise Act, 1944. [paras 4.3, 4.4, 5]

Commissioner of C.Ex. & Cus., Vadodara-I V/s Pharmanza Herbal Pvt. Ltd. [2014(306) E.L.T. 153(Guj.)] Appeal to High Court  Monetary limit prescribed therefore vide Department Circulars and Instructions  CBEC Instruction F. No. 390/MISC/163/2010/JC dated 20.10.2010, fixed monetary limit of 2 lakhs provided that where the duty involved or total revenue including amount of penalty is below that limit, the Department would not file the appeal, but the limit was enhanced to 10 lakhs in the subsequent CBEC Instruction F. No. 390/MISC/163/2010/JC dated 17.08.2011  Appeal in instant case was filed on 15.09.2010 i.e. before the date of the circular, however it came up for hearing after coming into force of the Circular dated 20.10.2010  Amount involved being Rs. 50,904/- i.e. less than prescribed limit, merits of appeal not considered and appeal by Department dismissed  Section 35G of Central Excise Act, 1944  Rule 5 of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. [paras 4, 4.1, 5, 6.1, 7] In view of the above settled legal position the present appeals involving amount Rs.67,688/- and Rs.11,456/- which are less than threshold limit of Rs. 5 lakhs are not maintainable and same are dismissed without going into merit of the case. CO also stands disposed of accordingly.

(Pronounced in Court)

(Ramesh Nair) Saifi Member (Judicial)

1