The High Court dismissed the appeal by a Bench at Jaipur. Learned counsel for the revenue submitted that the monetary limit in the appeal was below the prescribed amount, rendering it not maintainable under the relevant CBT instructions.
The appeal did not survive as the monetary limit was less than the prescribed amount.
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. 90/2018
Commissioner Of Customs Excise And Service Tax, Alwar Now Knows As Commissioner Central Goods And S, A-Block, Surya Nagar, Alwar Rajasthan 301001
----Appellant
Versus
Castex Technologies Ltd., Formerly Known As Amtek India Ltd., Located At Plot No. Sp-A, 1195, Riico Industrial Area, Phase-Iv, Bhiwadi, Rajasthan
----Respondent
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Sandeep Pathak.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA
Order
04/09/2019
Learned counsel for the appellant, 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-90/2018]
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 /23
Commissioner Of Customs Excise And Service Tax, Alwar
Castex Technologies Ltd.
Mohammad Rafiq
Narendra Singh Dhaddha
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
