2018 (2) TMI 1659 - AT - Central Excise

Tribunal closes long-pending appeals for statistical reasons, parties can apply for reopening

M/s. Anguvilas M.V. Muthaiah Pillai Firm, M/s. Angalamman Traders, M/s. Angumari Trading Co., M/s. Ambal Traders, M/s. MVM Angamuthupillai, M/s. ANS Arumga Nainar, M/s. Angu Trading Co., M/s. AVS Enterprises, M/s. Angu Eswari Co., M/s. Avciam Co., M/s. Angu Lakshmi Enterprises, M/s. Anguthai Co. And M/s. Angala Parameshwari Traders Versus Commissioner of Central Excise, Trichy

The Tribunal decided to close the files of long-pending appeals that had been stayed by the High Court, pending resolution of a writ petition since 2016. ... Disposal of pending cases - matter in question is pending before the High Court - Transition of Indirect Tax to GST - Held that: - it would be appropriate and prudent to close the files for the purpose of statistics - the appeals along with stay order / interim orders, if any, will continue before the Tribunal and the matters are closed only for the purpose of statistics - appeal disposed off. Issues: Stayed proceedings due to High Court order, pending appeals before Tribunal for more than a decade, disposal of old cases before transition to GST.Analysis:1. Stayed Proceedings: The judgment reveals that the cases were stayed by the Hon'ble High Court of Madras through an order dated 20.4.2016 in a specific writ petition. The High Court directed the CESTAT, Chennai not to proceed with the proceedings until the disposal of the writ petition. Unfortunately, neither party could provide an estimate of when the High Court would resolve the matter. Given the prolonged delay, the Tribunal considered it appropriate to close the files for statistical purposes. However, it was explicitly stated that the appeals, including any stay or interim orders, would still be active before the Tribunal and that the closure was solely for statistical reasons. Both parties were granted the liberty to apply for reopening the cases once the High Court disposes of the matter or if there are any significant changes in circumstances.2. Long-Pending Appeals: The judgment highlights that the appeals in question had been pending before the Tribunal for over a decade, dating back to the year 2006. Recognizing the need to clear old cases before the transition to the Goods and Services Tax (GST) regime, the Tribunal was tasked with disposing of all such cases, especially those predating 2007. In light of this mandate, the Tribunal decided to close the files for statistical purposes. However, it was explicitly clarified that the closure was not a termination of the appeals themselves, which would continue along with any existing stay or interim orders. The parties were given the opportunity to seek reopening of the cases once the High Court provides a resolution or if circumstances change significantly.3. Transition to GST: The judgment indirectly references the impending transition of Indirect Tax to the GST regime. Given this transition and the specific mandate to clear old cases before 2007, the Tribunal took a proactive stance in closing the files of long-pending appeals. This decision was made to ensure the efficient handling of cases and to meet the regulatory requirements in the context of the tax system transition. It is evident that the Tribunal aimed to streamline its workload and prioritize the resolution of older cases to adapt to the changing tax landscape effectively.