Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal

Cce, Jallandhar (Hq. At Chandigarh) vs Swaraj Mazda Ltd on 6 December, 2016

        

 
CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
SCO 147-148, SECTOR 17-C, CHANDIGARH  160 017
COURT NO. I

APPEAL NO. E/106/2009

[Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No. 703/CE/APPL/JAL/2008 dated 04.11.2008 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals), Jallandhar.]

Date of hearing/decision: 06.12.2016

For approval and signature:
Honble Mr. Ashok Jindal, Member (Judicial)
Honble Mr. Devender Singh, Member (Technical)
=======================================================

CCE, Jallandhar (Hq. at Chandigarh) :

Appellant(s) VS Swaraj Mazda Ltd. :
Respondent(s) ======================================================= Appearance:
Shri R.K. Sharma, A.R. for the Appellant(s) Ms. Krati Somani, Advocate for the Respondent(s) CORAM:
Honble Mr. Ashok Jindal, Member (Judicial) Honble Mr. Devender Singh, Member (Technical) FINAL ORDER NO. 61709/2016 Per : Ashok Jindal Revenue is in appeal against the order dated 04.11.2008 of Commissioner (Appeals) Central Excise, Jallandhar, wherein the demand of duty was dropped.

2. We are informed about the instructions dated 17.12.2015 issued by the CBEC in exercise of the powers conferred by Section 35R of the Central Excise Act, 1944 fixing monetary limits below which appeal shall not be filed in the Tribunal. The monetary limit has been enhanced to Rs. 10 Lakhs through the said instructions. Further, the Board vide letter dated 01.01.2016 clarified that the said instructions will apply to all pending appeals in CESTAT.

3. We also find that the Honble High Courts of Madras, Karnataka and Gujarat have held that the litigation policy containing monetary limit for filing appeals will apply to pending appeals also. [2015 (40) STR 656 (Mad); 2014 (306) ELT (Guj); 2011 (268) ELT 344 (kar.)]

4. Considering the above position, we dismiss the appeal filed by the Revenue. (Dictated and pronounced in the open court) Devender Singh Member (Technical) Ashok Jindal Member (Judicial) RAS 2 E/106/2009 - CHD