How they perpetuate Litigation
TIOL-DDT 2954
21 10 2016
Friday
ON 03.12.2015, on an appeal from the Commissioner of Central Excise, Ahmedabad-II against a CESTAT Order, the Gujarat High Court passed a brief order as given below.
1. From the impugned judgement of the CESTAT, we notice that, the dispute before the Tribunal was confined to the demand of Rs. 68,630/- which was to be recovered from the assessee in cash. Thus, the revenue implication involved in the appeal is limited to the principal sum of Rs. 68,630/-.
2. In view of the instructions prescribed under the circular dated 17.08.2011 by the CBEC limiting tax appeal to the High Court on monetary limits, this tax appeal is dismissed .
Obviously, the Commissioner was not happy with this order of the High Court. So, he filed a review petition against the order in the same High Court. The High Court in its order dated 11.03.2016, the full text of which is reproduced here, dismissed the review petition:
1. The delay condonation application is filed by the Revenue. In filing review petition, there is a delay of 6 days. We would have readily condoned the same after hearing the other side. However, we also perused the review petition and the ground, on which, the Revenue seeks recall of our order dated 03.12.2015 in Tax Appeal No. 928 of 2015. Such tax appeal was disposed of on the ground of low tax effect recording that the disputed amount is only Rs. 68,630 /-. The CBEC circular dated 17.08.2011 would not permit filing of appeals before the High Court involving tax effect of less than Rs. 10 lacs. Review is sought on the ground that this circular provides for certain exceptions, one of them being when the validity of the statute is in question. Admittedly, in the tax appeal, the validity of any statute was not a question. The contention of the Revenue appears to be that the Tribunal had given benefit to the assessee on the basis of invalidation of Rule 8(3A) of Central Excise Rules,2002. However, this is entirely a different matter and the case, therefore, would not fall under the such exception.
2. In the result, delay condonation application and the review petition both are dismissed.
A double dismissal is not what the Revenue can easily accept. So, they took the matter in appeal to the Supreme Court, as usual with an application for condonation of delay.
The Supreme Court heard the matter on Monday and ordered:
|
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C)......CC No(s).19015-19016/2016
(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 11/03/2016in CA No. 56/2016 03/12/2015 in TA No. 928/2015 passed by the High Court Of Gujarat at Ahmedabad)
Delay condoned.
Heard Mr. P.S. Narsimha, learned Additional Solicitor General appearing on behalf of the petitioner. As the tax effect is approximately Rs. 68,000 /-, we are not inclined to interfere in the impugned order.
The special leave petition stands dismissed accordingly.
|
For Rs. 68,000 , they took the matter to the High Court twice and even after the High Court emphatically dismissed their appeal and review petition, they with singular determination took the matter to the Supreme Court where the Additional Solicitor General of India along with three other lawyers represented the mighty Revenue Department. How much money they must have spent on this case for the lofty goal of recovering a paltry sum of Rs. 68,000 and that too after the Board has clearly told them that they cannot go to the High Court if the amount involved is less than 15 lakh rupees and to the Supreme Court if the amount is less than 25 lakh rupees. If they did not understand the Board or has no respect for it, the High Court told them twice that they should not have filed the appeal and yet they took the matter to the Supreme Court. Ironically, the Board did not follow its own instructions and allowed the SLP to be filed in the Supreme Court. Perhaps they don't realize that it was the taxpayers' toil that they were squandering with impunity.
And the Chairman speaks of "Mission Zero" before getting into GST. What will happen in GST regime in the hands of these litigation loving officers who will go to any extent to prove a point even against their boss (the Board) and the Courts?
Does 'Mission Zero' apply to us? - IRS Officer
AN IRS officer whose promotion and arrears of pay are pending for too many years asked me whether the CBEC Chairman's 'Mission Zero', would apply also to harassed officers.
Rebate of State Levies on Export of Garments - Implementation by CBEC
GOVERNMENT of India has decided to adopt a mechanism wherein the rebate of State levies on garment exports is provided based on a budgetary allocation of the Ministry of Textiles under a scheme in which the Department of Revenue/Central Board of Excise and Customs (CBEC) handles disbursement along with the extant Duty Drawback.
The ROSL scheme is meant for exports of garments that are defined in the scheme as goods falling under Chapters 61 or 62 of the Schedule of All Industry Rates of Drawback. It is applicable to exports with Let Export Order dates from 20.9.2016 onwards.
CBEC had issued Circular No. 43/2016-Customs dated 31.8.2016 in this regard. (DDT 2921 01 09 2016).
Now, Board informs that:
1. the address of the Textile Commissioner for communication is "Nishta Bhawan, New CGO Building, 48, New Marine Lines, Mumbai-400020" and email ID is txc-otxc@nic.in.
2. In para 12 of the said Circular there is reference to monthly email from the Systems Directorate (and every Customs location from where any RoSL rebate may have been processed manually) conveying the relevant list of claims to Ministry of Textiles. This email is to be sent to the "Director (Export), Room No. 266, Ministry of Textiles, Udyog Bhawan, New Delhi" at the email id neeravkr@nic.in.
CBEC Circular No. 47/2016-Customs, Dated: October 20, 2016
FTP - Inland Container Depots located at Kalinganagar and Tumbas Port of Registration
DGFT has amended the Handbook of Procedures 2015-2020 to include ICDs located at Kalinganagar and Tumb Village (Taluka Umbergaon, District Valsad)under para 4.37 (a) Hand Book of Procedures (2015-2020) for availing export promotion benefits under Chapter 4 of Foreign Trade Policy.
DGFT Public Notice No. 39/2015-2020, Dated: October 20, 2016
New Exchange Rates from Today
CBEC has notified new exchange rates for Imported Goods and for Export Goods with effect from 21st October 2016. The USD is 67.55 for imports and 65.90 Rupees for exports.
Notification No. 127/2016-Cus (NT)., Dated: October 20 2016
Penalty has to be Equal to Duty Under Section 11AC: Supreme Court
THE CESTAT had reduced the penalty imposed under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act. On appeal by Revenue, the Supreme Court recently held that Tribunal could not reduce penalty for an amount lesser than the duty which has been upheld. The Supreme Court directed the assessee to pay the balance of penalty within two months.
Please see 2016-TIOL-178-SC-CX
Earned Leave - No Limit of 300 days?
THE Government employees are entitled to 30 days of Earned Leave in a year and when they retire, they are entitled to encash a maximum of 300 days of leave. Whenever the leave credit exceeds 300 days, the excess leave lapses. This lapsing was challenged by a retired Haryana Government employee in the High Court.
In a recent judgement, the High Court observed,
If an employee is entitled to leave encashment for maximum limit of 300 days, that does not mean that the accumulated un-utilized leave is to be reduced to 300 days, if it exceeds the said maximum limit of 300 days. The earned leave will continue to accumulate till the retirement of the petitioners and the petitioners are to be granted the maximum benefit of 300 days, as stated in the rules.
The High Court ordered the Government to release the arrears of leave encashment payment along with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of retirement till payment.
The High Court also ordered that the Government should hold an inquiry and fix the responsibility as to who hasdone the wrong calculations and take follow up action against the delinquent official for causing harassment to the petitioners and dragging the respondent-department to the Court, resulting in un-necessary expenses and wastage of time of the Court.
An IRS officer tells me this judgement will have far reaching consequences right across the labour field and perhaps will also be applicable for Central Government employees.
Please see 2016-TIOL-2551-HC-P&H-SERVICE
Dubai Customs Smart Route - Zero Wait Time
SOON there would be no need to wait in long queues or go through tiresome inspection procedures at Dubai airport. The Dubai Customs has revealed the cutting-edge Smart Customs Route project. It is an interactive LED flooring that directs inbound passengers - as they enter the Customs area - to either go for luggage inspection by taking the red route or head to the exit following the green route.
The project is expected to have numerous advantages, such as streamlining passengers flow, increasing external and internal customers' satisfaction and improving the happiness meter as well as reflecting a modern image of Dubai.
Dubai Customs already has a Bags Smart Customs Inspection System; the world's first-of-its-kind inspection system. It was invented by Dubai Customs to better facilitate Customs inspection staff's functions, in a swift and innovative manner. The system aims to improve the customs experience for air travellers, ensuring smooth and seamless entry procedures. Timely information about the passenger or their luggage is automatically displayed before the inspector. Under this smart system, suspicious bags are screened and inspected in not more than three minutes.The state-of-the-art system has been globally recognized as a breakthrough in airport inspection.
Until Monday with more DDT
Have a nice weekend.
Mail your comments to vijaywrite@tiol.in
