Salient features of new forms for filing appeal to CESTAT
A day after issuance of the notification trio viz. Nos. 6/2013-Central Excise (N.T.), 37/2013-Customs (N.T.) and 5/2013-Service Tax, all dated 10.04.2013, the Board has come out with a Circular 969/03/2013-CX explaining the salient features of the new forms, the manner one has to go about it and the usefulness of the same. Officers and assessees would be required to be educated about it and the Board should conduct some training sessions at their national academy for the benefit of all. What we like is the content of the paragraph which would help us go green. It reads –
"(4) The above changes may be taken note of by the field formations as well as trade for proper usage of the new forms from 1.6.2013. However, the old forms may continue to be used for a period of three months from the date of coming into effect of the new forms, i.e. till 31.08.2013. From 01.09.2013 onwards, no appeal shall be filed in the old forms."
We know for sure that this date may see an extension but nonetheless it is a laudable gesture.
The Circular also mentions –
(6). The pre-figured alpha numeric numbers for all the 139 Commissionerates and 8 Commissioners (Adjudication) are being uploaded on the websites -
http://www.cbec.gov.in under Legal Affairs and http://www.cdrcestat.gov.in
Incidentally, we visited the CDR site which although proudly gives out a disclaimer mentioning that the contents of the site do not constitute advice and should not be relied upon in making any decision, yet we feel that since traffic to the site would increase pursuant to the Board Circular, it would be prudent to make corrections in the information doled out as under –
# In Delhi CESTAT there are Larger Benches/ Double Benches/ Single Benches are constituted for expeditious disposal of cases involving revenues.
# The Central Excise And Salt Act, 1944 (referred to for convenience as the Central Excises Act) and
Be that as it may, we wish that the new forms bring about quick disposal of cases pending in the CESTAT and the Draconian Circular 967 loses its poisonous fangs.
Last but not the least, ‘Ahmadabad' could have been spelt as ‘Ahmedabad' and it could also have been mentioned in explicit terms that old appeals do not have to go through this churning process…and that…they may continue to sulk?
Circular dated 11th April, 2013