C/86730/2022 — -COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS(IMPORT)-MUMBAI(AIR CARGO IMPORT) vs BRIGHTSTAR TELECOMMUNICATIONS INDIA LTD

CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI

REGIONAL BENCH - COURT NO. I

Customs Appeal No. 86730 of 2022

(Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No. MUM-CUSTM-AMP-APP-96/2022-23 dated 29.04.2022 passed by Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), Mumbai Zone-III)

Commissioner of Customs (Import),

.… Appellant Air Cargo Import, Mumbai Air Cargo Complex, Navpada, Sahar Village, Andheri East, Mumbai- 400 099.

Versus

Brightstar Telecommunications India Ltd. …. Respondent House No. 385/4, Building No. B-5,
Gala No. 1 to 10, Kharbhav, Vasai Road, Village Kalwar, Bhiwandi, Thane- 421 302.

APPEARANCE: Shri Jitesh Kumar Jain, Authorized Representative for the Revenue None for the Respondent

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. S.K. MOHANTY, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) HON’BLE MR. M.M. PARTHIBAN, MEMBER (TECHNICAL)

FINAL ORDER NO. A/85636/2026

                                                          Date of Hearing: 27.04.2026   
                                                          Date of Decision: 27.04.2026 

Per: S.K. MOHANTY

Heard both sides and perused the case records.

Feeling aggrieved with the impugned order 29.04.2022 passed by the learned Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), Mumbai Zone-III, Revenue has preferred this appeal before the Tribunal. The amount of differential duty involved in the impugned proceedings is Rs.4,71,347/-.

ssioner of Customs (Appeals), Mumbai Zone-III, Revenue has preferred this appeal before the Tribunal. The amount of differential duty involved in the impugned proceedings is Rs.4,71,347/-.

C/86730/2022
2

Insofar as the monetary limit for filing of appeal before the Appellate Tribunal is concerned, by deriving the powers conferred in Section 131BA of the Customs Act, 1962, the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC) has issued the instructions, from time to time, with the objective in reduction of the Government litigation in the area of Customs. In the latest instruction issued by the CBIC from file F. No. 390/Misc/30/2023-JC dated 02.11.2023, the threshold monetary limit of Rs. 50 lakhs has been prescribed, below which the appeal shall not be filed before the CESTAT. Though at paragraph 2 in the said instructions dated 02.11.2023, there is specific mention of agitating the matter before the Appellate Forum, irrespective of the involvement of the amount on certain issues, but the issue categorized therein are not confirming to the present appeal filed by the Revenue inasmuch as the issue relates to classification of the imported goods
by the respondent. Hence, the appeal can be disposed of in terms of the litigation policy formulated by the Government.

inasmuch as the issue relates to classification of the imported goods
by the respondent. Hence, the appeal can be disposed of in terms of the litigation policy formulated by the Government.

Considering the disputed amount of differential customs duty involved in the present appeal filed by Revenue, being only Rs.4,71,347/-, which is below the prescribed threshold limit as per the Instruction dated 02.11.2023, the appeal filed by Revenue in our considered view, is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, the appeal filed by Revenue is dismissed under the Litigation Policy of the Government. Cross-objection filed by respondent stands disposed of.

(Dictated and pronounced in open court)

(S.K. MOHANTY)

 MEMBER (JUDICIAL) 

(M.M. PARTHIBAN) MEMBER (TECHNICAL)

Sinha

C/86730/2022
3