Commissioner Of Customs & Central ... vs M/S. Manohar Wire Industries Ltd

Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal27 March 2015

CitationAPPEAL NO. E/734/05-MUM

Ratio decidendi

The rule this decision rests on

The Tribunal dismisses a departmental appeal without examining its merits because the duty amount involved is below the monetary threshold fixed by the Government Litigation Policy, which the Tribunal applies in light of the High Court decisions cited. The dismissal rests on that threshold policy and the cited judgments, and the merits of the underlying customs/excise issue are not decided.

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/734/05-MUM

[Arising out of Order-in- Appeal No. SVS/50/NGP-A/2004 dated 27/12/2004 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Central Excise, Nagpur]

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 Customs & Central Excise, Amravati :

Appellants

M/s. Manohar Wire Industries Ltd. :

Respondent

Appearance

Shri. Ashutosh Nath, Asst. Commissioner(A.R.)for the Appellant None for the Respondent

CORAM:

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

Date of hearing: 27/3/2013 Date of decision: 27/3/2013

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. (Operative part pronounced 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