Revenue's appeal dismissed under litigation policy; pending Writ Petition may affect penalty and fine decisions.

The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal as not maintainable under the litigation policy due to the amounts involved in the penalty and redemption fine. It was clarified that the litigation policy applied only to central excise and service tax, not Customs. The appellant's challenge to the penalty and redemption fine was linked to the modification of confiscation from absolute to simple. The Tribunal adjourned the appeals, pending the outcome of a related Writ Petition in the HC, which could impact the proceedings. Further hearings were scheduled after three months to consider developments in the Writ Petition.

---

---

Issues:
1. Maintainability of Revenue's appeal before the Tribunal.
2. Applicability of litigation policy to Customs matters.
3. Appeal against penalty and redemption fine by the appellant.
4. Appeal by Revenue against modification of confiscation.
5. Impact of pending Writ Petition on the appeal.

Analysis:
1. The Tribunal noted that the Revenue's appeal was disposed of as not maintainable under the litigation policy due to the substantial amounts involved in redemption fine and penalty. The Tribunal observed that the appeal was not maintainable based on the policy.

2. The Authorized Representative pointed out an error in the Final Order, indicating that the litigation policy applied only to central excise and service tax matters, not Customs matters. Reference was made to Instruction F.No.390/Misc./163/2010-JC dated 03 June, 2013, to support this argument.

3. The appellant in Customs Appeal No.70555 of 2019 challenged the order for penalty and redemption fine following the Commissioner (Appeals) setting aside the absolute confiscation of seized gold. The appeal focused on contesting the penalty and redemption fine imposed.

4. The Revenue's appeal was against the modification of absolute confiscation to simple confiscation. This aspect highlighted the differing positions of the parties regarding the confiscation of the seized gold, leading to separate appeals before the Tribunal.

5. The ongoing Writ Petition filed by the appellant in the Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court, concerning the disposal of the gold by Revenue, was noted to have a direct impact on the appeal. The Tribunal adjourned the appeals, tagging them together and scheduling further proceedings after three months to await developments in the Writ Petition.

This detailed analysis of the judgment from the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT ALLAHABAD covers the various issues involved, the arguments presented by the parties, and the Tribunal's decisions and directions based on the facts and legal considerations presented before it.

---