The Commissioner of GST and Central Excise, formerly known as the Commissioner of Customs Versus Shri Cheran Synthetics India Ltd.
Central Excise
2018 (10) TMI 1276 – MADRAS HIGH COURT – TMI
MADRAS HIGH COURT – HC
Dated:- 25-9-2018
Civil Miscellaneous Appeal Nos.2202 to 2204 of 2018
Central Excise
Mr. Justice T.S. Sivagnanam And Mrs. Justice V. Bhavani Subbaroyan
\nFor the Appellant : Mr.Rajnish Pathiyil, SPC
\nCOMMON JUDGMENT
\nT.S.SIVAGNANAM J.
\nThese appeals by the Revenue have been directed against the common order passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, South Zonal Bench, Chennai in Final Order Nos.42783 to 42785 of 2017 dated 24.10.2017 raising the following substantial questions of law:-\n<\/p>\n
= = = = = = = =<\/p>\n
Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n appeals based on the Board's monetary policy circular. He would state that on account of the monetary limits involved in these appeals, which are lesser than the threshold fixed by the Board's Circular dated 11.7.2018, he has been instructed to withdraw the appeals. = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" The Commissioner of GST and Central Excise, formerly known as the Commissioner of Customs Versus Shri Cheran Synthetics India Ltd.Central Excise2018 (10) TMI 1276 – MADRAS HIGH COURT – TMIMADRAS HIGH COURT – HCDated:- 25-9-2018Civil Miscellaneous Appeal Nos.2202 to 2204 of 2018 Central ExciseMr. Justice T.S. Sivagnanam And Mrs. Justice V. Bhavani Subbaroyan For the … Continue reading “The Commissioner of GST and Central Excise, formerly known as the Commissioner of Customs Versus Shri Cheran Synthetics India Ltd.”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-14642","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/14642","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=14642"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/14642\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=14642"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=14642"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=14642"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n
\n3. Be that as it may, it is seen that the appeals have been filed by the Revenue, which arose out of an order passed by the Tribunal dated 24.10.2017. The Original Authority rejected the refund claim of Rs. 36,96,374\/- and Rs. 42,13,167\/-. Thus, the monetary limits, involved in the instant case, being well below the amount fixed in the instruction dated 11.7.2018, we hold that the Department cannot pursue this appeals.
\n4. The letter produced by the learned Senior Panel<\/p>\n
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n