Separate threshold scrutiny of composite adjudications led to dismissal of appeals below the monetary limit.

Each appeal in a composite adjudication may be tested separately against the departmental monetary limit for filing, and a common order or common show cause notice does not prevent individual threshold scrutiny. Applying the Board's litigation policy, the tribunal found that several appeals involved amounts below the prescribed limit and treated them as not maintainable, while leaving the remaining appeal to be heard separately.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appeals, other than Appeal No. C/30189/2025, were not maintainable because the amount involved in each of them was below the monetary threshold fixed by the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs.

Analysis: The appeals were tested individually against the Board's litigation policy and monetary limit. The appeals listed as Appeal Nos. C/30191/2025, C/30192/2025, C/30194/2025, C/30195/2025 and C/30196/2025 each involved an amount below Rs. 50 lakhs. The Board's circular and instruction were treated as governing the filing threshold, and the fact that the original adjudication arose from a common order and common show cause notice did not prevent each appeal from being examined separately for threshold purposes.

Conclusion: Appeal Nos. C/30191/2025, C/30192/2025, C/30194/2025, C/30195/2025 and C/30196/2025 were held not maintainable and dismissed as below the monetary limit. Appeal No. C/30189/2025 was left to be heard separately.

Final Conclusion: The order finally rejected the appeals falling below the prescribed monetary threshold while keeping the remaining appeal alive for hearing.

Ratio Decidendi: In a composite adjudication, each appeal may be tested separately against the departmental monetary limit for filing an appeal.

---