2026 (3) TMI 768 - HC - Customs

Monetary threshold for government litigation: separately filed appeals must be assessed individually, barring aggregation to meet filing limit.

Government litigation instructions require that each separately filed appeal arising from a composite tribunal order be treated as an individual case for ... Maintainability of appeals - Litigation policy monetary threshold for filing appeals - treatment of composite orders - non-aggregation of values across separate appeals - Whether the departmental instructions prescribing a monetary limit for filing appeals before the High Court permit aggregation of values of separately filed appeals arising from a common incident - HELD THAT:- The Court accepted the interpretation given in the departmental instruction dated 26.12.2014 that the term 'case' is to be read as each appeal being a separate case for the purpose of the National Litigation Policy monetary thresholds. Having regard to that clarification, the values attributable to separately filed appeals cannot be aggregated merely because the seizures arose from a common incident. Applying the instruction dated 02.11.2023, each appeal must independently meet the prescribed monetary limit for an appeal to be filed before the High Court; only C.E.A.No.18 of 2025 exceeded that limit on the figures before the Court. Emphasis is on the instructional interpretation that a composite tribunal order giving rise to multiple departmental appeals renders each appeal subject to the threshold independently, precluding aggregation to satisfy the limit. [Paras 7, 8] The monetary threshold must be applied to each appeal separately and the appeals except C.E.A.No.18 of 2025 are not maintainable for failure to meet the prescribed monetary limit. Final Conclusion: The High Court dismissed the departmental appeals except C.E.A.No.18 of 2025, holding that the departmental monetary threshold applies to each appeal separately and values of distinct appeals cannot be aggregated to meet the limit. Issues: Whether the Department's appeals before the High Court are maintainable in view of the Central Government's litigation policy monetary threshold and whether values of separately filed appeals arising from a common seizure can be aggregated to meet the threshold.Analysis: The appeals arise from gold seizures and separate appeals were filed against penalty and confiscation orders. The Government's instructions dated 02.11.2023 prescribe a monetary limit of Rs.1,00,00,000/- for filing appeals before the High Court. The clarification in the instructions dated 26.12.2014 explains that where a composite tribunal order disposes of more than one appeal, each appeal is a separate 'case' and must be assessed against the threshold individually. Applying that interpretation to the present matters, the value relevant to each appeal must be calculated separately and the monetary threshold applied to each appeal on its own. The tabulated values show that only C.E.A. No.18 of 2025 exceeds the prescribed limit, while C.E.A. Nos.15, 16, 17, 19 and 21 of 2025 fall below the threshold.Conclusion: The appeals C.E.A. Nos.15, 16, 17, 19 and 21 of 2025 are not maintainable for failure to meet the prescribed monetary limit and are dismissed; only C.E.A. No.18 of 2025 meets the monetary threshold.Ratio Decidendi: For the purpose of the Government's monetary threshold under the national litigation policy, each separately filed appeal arising from a composite order must be treated as an individual case and assessed against the prescribed monetary limit independently; aggregation of values across separately filed appeals is not permissible.