Case Details: Commissioner of Customs vs. Sedna Impex Pvt. Ltd. (2025) 35 Centax 6 (S.C.)
Judiciary and Counsel Details
- Manoj Misra & Ujjal Bhuyan, JJ.
- S/Shri N. Venkataraman, A.S.G., V.C. Bharathi, Padmesh Mishra, Udai Khanna, Sarthak Karol, Sidharth Yadav, Advs. & Gurmeet Singh Makker, AOR, for the Appellant.
Facts of the Case
The Department filed a special leave petition before the Hon’ble Supreme Court against the order of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) which had dismissed its appeal on the ground of monetary limit. The Tribunal had held that cases involving the issue of valuation and an amount less than ₹50 lakh were not covered under the exceptions provided in Para 2 of the C.B.I. & C. (Judicial Cell) Instruction F. No. 390/Misc./30/2023-JC, dated 02-11-2023, which fixed a threshold monetary limit of ₹50 lakh for preferring appeals by the department before the CESTAT. The Department contended that its appeal was maintainable despite the monetary limit, as the issue pertained to valuation. The matter was accordingly placed before the Hon’ble Supreme Court.
Supreme Court Held
The Hon’ble Supreme Court held that as the differential Customs duty involved was below ₹50 lakh, the appeal filed by the Department did not fall within the exceptions stipulated in Para 2 of the C.B.I. & C. (Judicial Cell) Instruction F. No. 390/Misc./30/2023-JC, dated 02-11-2023. The Court observed that the CESTAT had correctly applied the Department’s litigation policy issued under Section 131BA of the Customs Act, 1962, in holding that such appeals were not maintainable and were liable to be dismissed without going into the merits. After condoning the delay in filing, the Supreme Court found no reason to interfere with the impugned order and dismissed the special leave petition.
List of Cases Reviewed
- Commissioner v. Sedna Impex Pvt. Ltd. — (2025) 34 Centax 16 (Tri.-Chan) — Affirmed [Para 2]
