Revenue must file 399 separate appeals for each Bill of Entry under Rule 6(A) instead of 4 consolidated appeals

CESTAT Chandigarh dismissed 4 appeals filed by Revenue against 399 Bills of Entry as not maintainable. The tribunal interpreted Rule 6(A) of CESTAT Procedure Rules, holding that when multiple order-in-original are passed, separate appeals must be filed for each order. Since Commissioner (Appeals) passed 4 orders covering 399 Bills of Entry, Revenue was required to file 399 separate appeals challenging each Bill of Entry as individual assessment orders. The tribunal relied on precedents from Ahmedabad Bench and J&K HC, directing Revenue to file 399 appeals instead of 4 if they choose to proceed.

---

---

Issues:
- Maintainability of 4 appeals against a total of 399 Bills of Entry

Analysis:

The judgment pertains to 4 appeals filed by the Revenue against Orders-in-Appeal passed by the Commissioner of Customs setting aside assessments made on enhanced value accepted by the importer. The appeals concern a total of 399 Bills of Entry but only 4 appeals were filed. The main issue is whether the 4 appeals are maintainable or if the Revenue should have filed 399 appeals, one for each Bill of Entry. The Appellate Tribunal considered the arguments presented by both parties regarding the maintainability of the appeals.

The Counsel for the respondent raised a preliminary objection, arguing that separate appeals should have been filed for each Bill of Entry as per the CESTAT Procedure Rules. The Counsel highlighted that the Revenue filed only 4 appeals to circumvent monetary limits on filing appeals. The Counsel cited relevant case laws to support the argument that each Bill of Entry should have a separate appeal. On the other hand, the Authorized Representative for the Revenue relied on an Interim/Miscellaneous Order from the Tribunal to support the maintainability of the 4 appeals.

After considering the submissions, the Tribunal focused on Rule 6(A) of the CESTAT Procedure Rules, which states that the number of appeals filed should correspond to the number of orders-in-original. The Tribunal found that since the Commissioner of Customs passed 4 orders-in-appeal covering 399 Bills of Entry, the Revenue should have filed 399 appeals. The Tribunal referenced a case from the Ahmedabad Bench and a judgment from the Jammu & Kashmir High Court to support its decision. The Tribunal emphasized that each appeal represents a distinct cause of action, necessitating separate consideration based on monetary thresholds.

Ultimately, the Tribunal ruled that the 4 appeals filed by the Revenue were not maintainable and directed the Revenue to file 399 appeals if advised to do so. The judgment was pronounced on 18.07.2024, disposing of the four appeals due to their lack of maintainability.

---