CBEC

Introduction of monetary limit of Rs. 2.50 lakhs at the level of Commissioner (Appeals)-CBEC Instruction

Introduction of monetary limit at the level of Commissioner-Appeals-CBIC fixes Rs 2,50,000/- below which appeal shall not be filed with Commissioner (A)

F No 390/Misc/116/2017-JC
Government of India
Ministry of Finance
Department of Revenue
Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs

New Delhi 25 May 2018

INSTRUCTION

To

  1. All Principal Chief Commissioners/ Chief Commissioner of Customs/ Central Excise & Service Tax and Directors General under the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs.
  2. CC (AR), Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal.
  3. All the Principal Commissioners/ Commissioner of Customs/ Central Excise & Service Tax/ All Joint Chief Departmental Representatives/ Commissioners, Directorate of Legal Affairs.
  4. cbec@icegate.gov.inWebmaster, CBEC

Madam/ Sir,

Subject: Reduction of Government litigation-Introduction of monetary limit at the level of Commissioner (Appeals), in legacy Central Excise Service Tax matters only regarding

1. Introduction of monetary limit at the level of Commissioner (Appeals) :

a. In exercise of the powers conferred by Section 35R of the Central Excise Act, 1944 made applicable to Service Tax vide Section 83 of the Finance Act, 1994 the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs fixes a monetary limit of Rs 2,50,000/- below which appeal shall not be filed with the Commissioner (A).

b. This limit would apply for legacy matters only and would also be applicable to cases currently pending at the level of Commissioner (Appeals) .

c. Withdrawal process in respect of pending cases in Commmissioner (A), will follow the current practice that is being followed in the withdrawal of Departmental cases from the CESTAT and HC. The monetary limit shall be determined as per the Instruction dated 17.08.2011. All other terms and conditions of concerned earlier instructions apply

2. Amendment of earlier Instruction dated 04.04.2018:

The following phrase in the earlier instruction dated 04.04.2018 para 1 is hereby withdrawn: “and Section 131BA of the Customs Act 1962”

3.Monthly reports in MPR:

Formats to capture the above data would be introduced in the MPR for reporting upon the action taken in this regard. Details of the said cases should also be available in a separate register for further perusal by the Board as and when required. The format of the Tables is in the Annexure. The description of the Tables in brief is provided below:

a. Table X: Withdrawal of Departmental appeals at Commissioner (Appeals) .

b.Table X-1 : Remaining to be Filed/Withdrawn

4. Difficulties faced any in implementation of the above Instruction may be brought to notice of the Board.

(Ranjana Jha)
JS (Judicial Cell)

Annexure

Table X

Withdrawal of Departmental appeals at Commissioner (Appeals)

As on(Last working day)–/–/–

Position of withdrawal of Departmental appeals at the level of Commissioner (Appeals)
S No I. Zones (in alphabetical order) 11.1dentified III. Filed IV. Withdrawn
         
         
  Total      

Table X -1
Remaining to be Filed/Withdrawn at Commissioner (Appeals)

As on(Last working day)–/–/–

Cases remaining to be filed and withdrawn vis a vis Table X
No I. Zones (in alphabetical order) II. Remaining to be filed* III. Remaining to be withdrawn**
       
  Total    

*identified minus filed in Table X
**filed minus withdrawn in Table X

Download CBIC Instruction Click Here >>

Share

Recent Posts

  • Income Tax

AO took a reasonable stand that 25 kg written in WhatsApp chat was 25 lakh – ITAT

Assessing Officer had taken a reasonable stand that 25 kg written in WhatsApp chat/text message was 25 lakh - ITAT…

7 hours ago
  • Income Tax

Shareholders can’t be taxed for income from properties owned by the company – HC

Shareholders are only owners of the shares of the company therefore, income from properties earned by the company cannot be…

9 hours ago
  • Income Tax

Jurisdictional error in reassessment approval can’t be shielded by the law of limitation

When approval for reassessment was granted by unauthorised authority, such jurisdictional error cannot be shielded by the law of limitation…

12 hours ago
  • Income Tax

ITAT ought to remanded whole matter of bogus purchases instead of profit determination

ITAT on presumption of bogus purchases ought to have remanded case to AO to reconsider the whole matter instead of…

13 hours ago
  • Income Tax

Where proceedings u/s 153C barred by limitation, AO can’t invoke section 148 & 148A

Where proceedings u/s 153C are barred by limitation, AO can not reopen the case invoking section 148 and 148A of…

1 day ago
  • bankruptcy

Corporate guarantees executed by corporate debtor constitute “financial debt” under IBC

Corporate guarantees executed by the corporate debtor constitute “financial debt” under IBC and banks to be recognized as financial creditors…

1 day ago