CBIC appeals below Rs. 50 lakhs dismissed as non-maintainable under 2023 circular guidelines

CESTAT Chandigarh dismissed a departmental appeal as non-maintainable due to monetary threshold limits. The CBIC circular dated 02.11.2023 prescribed that appeals involving duty amounts below Rs. 50 lakhs shall not be filed before CESTAT, and if already filed, must be withdrawn. The duty amount in this case fell below the prescribed threshold. The tribunal referenced Bombay HC precedent supporting disposal of appeals below monetary limits. Respondent's counsel raised no objection to dismissal on these grounds. The appeal was dismissed for non-compliance with CBIC instructions regarding minimum monetary thresholds for litigation.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Assessment of enhanced value of imported goods.
2. Validity of the importer's protest against the enhanced value.
3. Applicability of CBIC's monetary limit instructions for filing appeals.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Assessment of Enhanced Value of Imported Goods:
The case involves the importer filing three Bills of Entry for importing "Fabrics" at ICD Ballabhgarh on a self-assessment basis. The Assessing Officer found the declared value inadequate compared to contemporaneous import data of similar goods, leading to the rejection of the declared value under Rule 12 of CVR, 2007, and enhancement of the assessable value. The differential duty amounted to Rs. 18,44,219/-. The importer accepted the enhanced value voluntarily but later appealed against the assessment. The Commissioner (Appeals) remanded the matter, directing a speaking order under Section 17(5) of the Customs Act, 1962. The Deputy Commissioner then passed a speaking order reaffirming the enhanced value based on contemporaneous data under Rule 5 of CVR, 2007. The Commissioner (Appeals) set aside this re-assessment, citing the lack of specific Bills of Entry references and the importer's substantiation of the declared value through Outward Remittance Transaction Advice.

2. Validity of the Importer's Protest Against the Enhanced Value:
The Revenue contended that the importer's acceptance of the enhanced value and payment of duty without protest negated the need for a speaking order under Section 17(5) of the Customs Act, 1962. The Commissioner (Appeals) noted that the importer's acceptance lost relevance once a protest was lodged, and the rejection of declared value must strictly adhere to CVR, 2007, and Section 14 of the Customs Act, 1962. The Commissioner (Appeals) found that the Assessing Authority failed to disclose contemporaneous data details and that there was no allegation of incorrect documents or related parties.

3. Applicability of CBIC's Monetary Limit Instructions for Filing Appeals:
The respondent's counsel argued that the appeal is not maintainable due to the monetary threshold limit of Rs. 50 lakhs set by the Ministry of Finance, CBIC's instructions dated 02.11.2023, for filing appeals. These instructions aim to reduce litigation and streamline the process, binding on the department under Section 131BA of the Customs Act, 1962. The counsel cited several judicial decisions affirming the binding nature of such instructions on the department. The Revenue's representative justified the appeal, claiming it fell under exceptions to the monetary limit, but the tribunal found the appeal non-maintainable as the duty involved was below the prescribed limit.

Conclusion:
The tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal, upholding the Commissioner (Appeals)'s order setting aside the enhanced value assessment. The tribunal emphasized the binding nature of CBIC's monetary limit instructions, reinforcing the objective of reducing litigation involving meager revenue amounts. The decision left the question of law open, consistent with precedents emphasizing adherence to CBIC's instructions for uniformity and reduction of unnecessary litigation.

---