Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
Commissioner Of Central Excise, ... vs Kisanveer Satara Ssk Ltd on 30 June, 2016
IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL WEST ZONAL BENCH AT MUMBAI APPEAL No. E/86446/14-Mum E/CO/91116/14-Mum (Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No. PUN-EXCUS-002-APP-180-13-14 dated 3.2.2014 passed by Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Pune-II) For approval and signature: Honble Mr. Devender Singh, Member (Technical) ======================================================
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, Kolhapur Appellant Vs. Kisanveer Satara SSK Ltd. Respondent Appearance:
Shri Sanjay Hasija, Superintendent (AR), for appellant None for respondent CORAM:
Honble Mr. Devender Singh, Member (Technical) Date of Hearing: 30.6.2016 Date of Decision: 30.6.2016 ORDER NO The learned AR, Shri Sanjay Hasija, appearing for the Revenue submits, at the outset, that the department vide letter dated 8.3.2016 has prayed for withdrawal of the appeal. He submits that the amount involved in the present appeal is Rs.8.52 lakhs and the issue does not fall in the exceptions mentioned in the litigation policy circulars issued by the CBEC.
2. Keeping in view the fact that the amount involved is less than Rs.10,00,000/- and as per the litigation policy of the Government vide Boards letter F.No. 390/Misc./163/2010-JC dated 17.8.2011 as clarified vide Instruction No. 390/Misc/163/2010-JC dated 1.1.2016 read with Honble Gujarat High Courts judgments in the case of CCE, Surat-I vs. Shreenath Fabrics reported in 2014 (303) ELT 540 (Guj.) and in the case of CCE, 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 CCE, Bangalore-III vs. Presscom Products reported in 2011 (268) ELT 344 (Kar.), the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed as withdrawn, without going into the merits of the case. The cross objections filed by the respondent are also disposed of.
(Pronounced in Court) (Devender Singh) Member (Technical) tvu 1 2