Principaal Commissioner, Central Goods And Services Tax v. M/S Bajaj Hindusthan Ltd
Case at a glance
Outcome
Dismissed
Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed as not maintainable
Provisions considered
Key paragraphs
- Para 55. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed as not maintainable. Order Date :- 27.5.2025 Imroz (Dr. Y. K. Srivastava, J.) (Shekhar B. Saraf, J.) MOHAMMAD IMROZ KHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad 2 of 2
Judgment
Hon'ble Shekhar B. Saraf,J. Hon'ble Dr. Yogendra Kumar Srivastava,J.
Heard Sri Ramesh Chandra Shukla, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant and Ms. Chhaya Gautam, holding brief of Sri Shubham Agrawal, learned counsel for the respondent.
Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent submits that the present appeal is not maintainable as per Circular/Letter No.390/Misc./30/2023/JC dated 2.11.2023. The said circular is delineated below: "To, 1. All Pr. Chief Commissioners/ Chief Commissioners/ Pr. Commissioners/ Commissioners of Customs/ Customs (Prev.)/ GST & CX;
2. All Pr. Director Generals/ Directors Generals under CBIC;
Chief Commissioner (AR); Commissioners (Legal) CBIC/ Directorate of Legal Affairs
[REDACTED] Subject: Reduction of Government litigation – providing monetary limits for filing appeals by the Department before CESTAT, High Courts and Supreme Court – regarding In exercise of the powers conferred by Section 131BA of the Customs Act, 1962 and in partial modification of earlier instruction issued from F. No. 390/Misc./163/2010-JC dated 17.08.2011, the Central Board of Indirect Taxes & Customs (hereinafter referred to as the Board) fixes the following monetary limits below which appeal shall not be filed in the CESTAT, High Court and the Supreme Court: S. No. Appellate Forum Monetary Limit 1 2 3 SUPREME COURT Rs. 2 Crore HIGH COURTS Rs. 1 Crore CESTAT Rs. 50 Lakh
2. Adverse judgements relating to the following should be contested irrespective of the amount involved: a) Where the constitutional validity of the provisions of an Act or Rule is under challenge; b) Where Notification/Instruction/Order or Circular has been held illegal or ultra vires; c) Classification and refund issues which are of legal and/or recurring nature.
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."
3. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent further submits that since the value of the tax involved in the present appeal is less than Rs.1 Crore, the present appeal filed by the department is required to be withdrawn by the department.
4. Upon perusal of the documents and the aforesaid circular, we are of the view that the present appeal is covered by the above mentioned circular.
Operative part
Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed as not maintainable. Order Date :- 27.5.2025 Imroz (Dr. Y. K. Srivastava, J.) (Shekhar B. Saraf, J.) MOHAMMAD IMROZ KHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad 2 of 2
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed as not maintainable
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
BA of the Customs Act, 1962.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Allahabad High Court, on 27 May 2025.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.