The Court dismissed two appeals filed by the Revenue under section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The appeal values were less than Rs.10 lakhs, rendering them non-maintainable in view of a Central Board circular restricting High Court appeals below that threshold. No costs were awarded.
Appeals dismissed. No costs.
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.
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM
AND
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO
C.E.A.No.215 of 2011 and C.E.A.No.14 of 2012
COMMON JUDGMENT:
(Per Hon’ble Sri Justice M.S.Ramachandra Rao)
Heard Sri Bathula Raj Kiran, learned counsel appearing for the appellants/Revenue and M/s. Lakshmi Kumaran and Sridharan, for respondents at the stage of admission.
C.E.A.No.215 of 2011 and C.E.A.No.14 of 2012 are filed by the Revenue u/s.35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (for short ‘the Act’) challenging the Final Order No.449/2010 dt.11.02.2010 in Appeal No.Excise/835/08 and Final Order No.899/2010 dt.11.06.2010 in Appeal No.ST/35/2008 of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, South Zonal Bench, Bangalore.
Admittedly, the Revenue effect in C.E.A.No.215 of 2011 is only Rs.27,969/- and in C.E.A.No.14 of 2012 is only Rs.3,64,270/-.
It is not disputed by the counsel for the appellant that the Central Board of Excise and Customs has issued a circular F.No.390/Misc/163/2010-JC dt.17.08.2011 directing that the appeals to the High Court shall not be filed where the value of the appeal is less than Rs.10
lakhs. In view of the above circular, we are of the view that these appeals could not have been preferred by the Revenue as the Revenue effect involved is less than Rs.10 lakhs.
Therefore, the appeals are dismissed. No costs.
____________________________ JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM
__________________________________ JUSTICE M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO
Date:25-02-2013 Siva
2 issues framed by the court
Whether appeals filed under section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 by the Revenue can be maintained when the value of the appeal is less than Rs.10 lakhs.
Whether a circular by the Central Board of Excise and Customs invalidates appeals filed by the Revenue below the monetary threshold.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Revenue
Respondents
Goda Raghuram
M.S.Ramachandra Rao
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
