The Kerala High Court dismissed the Central Excise Appeal invoking the National Litigation Policy due to the dispute amount being under 2,00,000. The court held no substantial question of law existed, rendering the appeal's acceptance not merited.
The appeal under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act is dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN
TUESDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF FEBRUARY 2016/4TH PHALGUNA, 1937
C.E.Appeal.No. 32 of 2010
AGAINST THE FINAL ORDER NO.637 OF 2010 DATED 23.03.2010 IN APPEAL NO.ST/305/2008 PASSED BY CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SOUTH ZONAL BENCH AT BANGALORE AND RECEIVE BY THE APPELLANT ON 13.04.2010.
APPELLANT(S) :
THE COMMISSIONER, CENTRAL EXCISE, SERVICE TAX & CUSTOMS, C.R.BUILDINGS, I.S.PRESS ROAD, COCHIN-18.
BY ADV. SRI.THOMAS MATHEW NELLIMOOTTIL, S.C
RESPONDENT(S) :
M/S.GLASS FIBRES, KRISHNA NIVAS, MEVELLOOR P.O., KOTTAYAM-686 609.
BY ADVS. SRI.JOY THATTIL ITTOOP SMT.RAKHI K.KUMAR
THIS CENTRAL EXICISE APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 23-02-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
Msd.
C.E.Appeal.No. 32 of 2010
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' ANNEXURES :
ANNEXURE A: TRUE COPY OF THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE NO.31/06/ST DATED 06.06.2006 ISSUED BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, KOTTAYAM DIVISION.
ANNEXURE B: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN ORIGINAL NO.18/06/R DATED 27.07.2006. ANNEXURE C: TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER IN APPEAL NOS.42/2008 ST AND 43/2008/ST DATED 28.02.2008. ANNEXURE D: FINAL ORDER NO.637 OF 2010 DATED 23.03.2010 IN APPEAL NO.ST/305/2008.
RESPONDENT(S)' ANNEXURES :
NIL
//TRUE COPY//
P.A.TO JUDGE
Msd.
THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN &
ANU SIVARAMAN, JJ.
C.E.A.No.32 of 2010
Dated this the 23rd day of February, 2016
J U D G M E N T
Thottathil B.Radhakrishnan, J.
We have heard the learned senior standing counsel for the Central Board of Excise and Customs. We see that the amount that is involved in dispute in this appeal is less than 2,00,000/- and,₹ therefore, is covered by the instructions of CBEC against prosecution of such matters in consonance with the National Litigation Policy. We are also of the view that the facts of the case generate only issues relating to quantification and the question of the rejection of certain claims relatable to 'Cargo Handling Service' etc. We also do not find any question of law much less any substantial question of law arising for decision in this appeal at the instance of the Revenue. Hence, this appeal under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act does not merit acceptance.
In the result, this appeal is dismissed.
Sd/- (THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE)
Sd/-
(ANU SIVARAMAN, JUDGE)
True copy
P.A to Judge
DG
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the appeal under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act merits acceptance given the low dispute amount and lack of substantial question of law.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
THE COMMISSIONER, CENTRAL EXCISE, SERVICE TAX & CUSTOMS
M/S.GLASS FIBRES
THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN
ANU SIVARAMAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
