The Appellate Bench dismissed the appellant revenue's appeal, holding that the monetary value of the case fell below the prescribed limit under CBI & Customs instructions, rendering the appeal inadmissible.
The appeal is dismissed as it does not survive due to the monetary limit prescribed.
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.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
D.B. Central/excise Appeal No. 78/2018
Commissioner Of Central Goods And Service Tax, Jaipur Earlier Known As Commissioner Of Central Exci, Commissionerate Jaipur, New Central Revenue Building Statue Circle, C-Scheme, Jaipur The State Of Rajasthan
----Appellant
Versus
World Trade Park Ltd., Earlier Known As R.f. Properties And Trading Ltd., Having Its Address At World Trade Park Building, Jawahar Lal Nehru Marg, Malviya Nagar, Jaipur In The State Of Rajasthan
----Respondent
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Siddharth Ranka.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA
Order
05/09/2019
Learned counsel for the appellant-revenue, at the very outset, has placed before this Court a copy of the instruction dated 22.08.2019 issued by the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs in exercise of the powers conferred by Section 35R of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and made applicable to Service Tax vide Section 83 of the Finance Act, 1994 whereby the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs has fixed the following
monetary limits below which appeal shall not be filed:-
| Sr. No. | Appellate Forum | MonetaryLimit |
|---|---|---|
| 1. | CESTAT | Rs.50,00,000/- |
| 2. | High Courts | Rs.1,00,00,000/- |
| 3. | Supreme Court | Rs.2,00,00,000/- |
(2 of 2)
[EXCIA-78/2018]
Clause 2 and 3 of the instruction dated 22.08.2009
reads thus:-
“2. This instruction applies only to legacy issues i.e. matters relating to Central Excise and Service Tax, and will apply to pending cases as well.
3.Withdrawal process in respect of pending cases in above forums, as per the above revised limits, will follow the current practice that is being followed for the withdrawal of cases from the Supreme court, High Courts and CESTAT. All other terms and conditions of concerned earlier instructions will continue to apply.”
Learned counsel for the revenue submits that monetary
limit in this appeals is less than the prescribed amount.
In view of the above, the appeal does not survive and the same is dismissed.
(NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA),J
(MOHAMMAD RAFIQ),J
MANOJ NARWANI /146
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the appeal falls within the monetary limits prescribed by the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs instructions for non-admissibility.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Commissioner Of Central Goods And Service Tax
World Trade Park Ltd.
Mohammad Rafiq
Narendra Singh Dhaddha
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
