CIT Vs Enercon India Ltd. (Supreme Court of India)
Summary: The Supreme Court of India disposed of the Special Leave Petition filed by the Revenue against Enercon India Ltd. after counsel for the petitioner sought permission to withdraw the matter on account of low tax effect. The request was made on instructions issued by the Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance, vide F. No.390/Misc./116/2017-JC dated 22 August 2019. The Revenue also sought withdrawal of the pending applications accompanying the Special Leave Petition.
The Supreme Court granted permission to withdraw the Special Leave Petition, subject to just exceptions. Accordingly, the Special Leave Petition and pending applications were dismissed as withdrawn, while expressly leaving the question of law open. Thus, the Court did not adjudicate the substantive tax dispute or determine the legal issue on merits. The disposal was confined to withdrawal of the proceedings due to low tax effect.
CBIC Instruction F. No.390/Misc./116/2017-JC dated 22 August 2019.: The Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC), Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, issued Instruction F. No. 390/Misc./116/2017-JC dated 22 August 2019, enhancing the monetary limits for filing departmental appeals in legacy Central Excise and Service Tax matters to ₹50 lakh before CESTAT, ₹1 crore before High Courts and ₹2 crore before the Supreme Court. Issued under Section 35R of the Central Excise Act, 1944, read with Section 83 of the Finance Act, 1994, the instruction aimed to reduce unnecessary government litigation and enable the Department to concentrate on cases involving substantial revenue implications. The revised limits also applied to pending departmental appeals, subject to specified exceptions involving substantial questions of law. Consequently, appeals falling below the prescribed monetary thresholds were generally not to be filed or continued, unless covered by an applicable exception. The instruction represents an administrative litigation-management measure and does not determine the substantive merits of the underlying tax dispute. It specifically concerns legacy Central Excise and Service Tax matters and should not be confused with CBDT instructions governing monetary limits for income-tax appeals.
FULL TEXT OF THE SUPREME COURT JUDGMENT/ORDER
Learned counsel for the petitioner, on instructions, issued by the Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance vide F. No.390/Misc./116/2017-JC dated 22.08.2019, seeks permission to withdraw this Special Leave Petition along with pending applications therein due to low tax effect.
Permission granted, subject to just exceptions. The special leave petition and pending applications are dismissed as withdrawn, leaving question of law open.
