APHC010415642024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3529] TUESDAY,THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR CENTRAL EXCISE APPEALS NO: 15, 16, 17, 19 and 21 of 2025 Between: 1. THE COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS,, CUSTOMS COMMISSIONERATE (PREVENTIVE), D.NO.5 5-17-3, 2ND FLOOR, ROAD NO.2, INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, AUTONAGAR, VIJAYAWADA - 520 007. ...APPELLANT AND 1. ARAVAPALLI SRINIVASA RAO, Flat No. 401, Brindavan Gardens Apartment, 1st Lane. Narasaraopet, Guntur, Andhra Pradesh - 522 601. ...RESPONDENT may be pleased to quash and set aside the impugned Final Order No. A/30210/2024 CU(SM) dated 15-03-2024 passed by the Honble CESTAT, Hyderabad Bench in Appeal No. C/30325/2023, and/ or pass IA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased may be pleased to to condone the delay of 181 days in re-presenting the above case in CEA. No. 15 of 2025 and pass IA NO: 2 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased may be pleased to stay the operation of impugned Final Order No. A/30210/2024 CU[SM] dated 15.03.2024 passed by the Hon’ble CESTAT, Hyderabad in Appeal No. C/30325/2023, pending disposal of the main Appeal and to pass Counsel for the Appellant: 1. SANTHI CHANDRA (Sr. Standing Counsel for CBIC) Counsel for the Respondent: 1. MAHESWARI ARIKA CENTRAL EXCISE APPEALS NO: 16/2025 Between: 1. THE COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, CUSTOMS COMMISSIONERATE (PREVENTIVE), D.NO.55-17-3, 2D FLOOR, ROAD NO.2, INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, AUTONAGAR, VIJAYAWADA - 520 007. ...APPELLANT AND 1. VEMULA KRANTI KUMAR, S/o Sri Rama Rao, First Floor, Near Balaji Complex, Near Telephone Exchange, Narasaraopet, Guntur, Andhra Pradesh - 522 601. ...RESPONDENT he above-named Appellant begs to present this Memorandum of Customs Appeal, being aggrieved by the Final Order No. A/30214/2024 dated 18.03.2024 passed by the Honble Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Regional Bench, Hyderabad (for brevity CESTAT) in Appeal No. C/30327/2023 filed by Vemula Kranti Kumar, the respondents herein, which was received by the Appellant on 25.03.2024 IA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased pleased to eondone the delay of .224.. days in filing the instant appeal against the impugned Final Order No. A/30214/2024 dated 18.03.2024 passed by the Hon’ble CESTAT, Hyderabad in Appeal No. C/30327/2023, and to pass IA NO: 2 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased Pleased to dispense with filing of the certified copy of the impugned Final Order No. A/30214/2024 dated 18.03.2024 passed by the Hon’ble CESTAT, Hyderabad in Appeal No. C/30327/2023, pending disposal of the main Appeal and to pass IA NO: 3 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased pleased to stay the operation of impugned Final Order No. A/30214/2024 dated 18.03.2024 passed by the Hon’ble CESTAT, Hyderabad in Appeal No. C/30327/2023, pending disposal of the main Appeal and to pass Counsel for the Appellant: 1. SANTHI CHANDRA (Sr. Standing Counsel for CBIC) Counsel for the Respondent: 1. G PRAHLAD CENTRAL EXCISE APPEALS NO: 17/2025 Between: 1. THE COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, CUSTOMS COMMISSIONERATE (PREVENTIVE), D.NO.55-17-3, 2ND FLOOR, ROAD NO.2, INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, AUTONAGAR, VIJAYAWADA - 520 007. ...APPELLANT AND 1. PACHIPULUSU VENKATA MURALI JAGANNADHA RAO, S/o Sri Venkateswarlu, Partner of M/s. Venkateswara Jewellers, ...RESPONDENT pleased to quash and set aside the impugned Final Order No. A/30215/2024 dated 18.03.2024 passed by the Hon'ble n CESTAT, Hyderabad in Appeal No. C/30328/2023, and/ or pass su IA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased pleased to to condone the delay of 208 days in re-presenting the above case in CEA. SR. No. 32761 of 2024 and pass IA NO: 2 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased Pleased to stay the operation of impugned Final Order No. A/30215/2024 dated 18.03.2024 passed by the Hon’ble CESTAT, Hyderabad in Appeal No. C/30328/2023, pending disposal of the main Appeal and to pass Counsel for the Appellant: 1. SANTHI CHANDRA (Sr. Standing Counsel for CBIC) Counsel for the Respondent: 1. G PRAHLAD CENTRAL EXCISE APPEALS NO: 19/2025 Between: 1. THE COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL TAX AND CUSTOMS, CUSTOMS COMMISSIONERATE (PREVENTIVE), D.NO.55-17-3,2ND FLOOR, ROAD NO.2, INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, AUTONAGAR, VIJAYAWADA - 520 007. ...APPELLANT AND 1. TADEPALLI PRASANNANJANEYULU, H. No. 3-11-40, Besides Sreerastu Function Hall, Paturu, Narasaraopet, Guntur, Andhra Pradesh - 522 601. ...RESPONDENT pleased to quash and aside the impugned Final Order No. A/30216/2024 dated 18.03.2024 passed by the Honble CESTAT, Hyderabad in Appeal No. C/30331/2023, and/ set or pass IA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased pleased to condone the delay of 223 days in filing the instant appeal against the impugned Final Order No. A/30216/2024 dated 18.03.2024 passed by the Hon’ble CESTAT, Hyderabad in Appeal No. C/30331/2023, and to pass IA NO: 2 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased pleased to dispense with filing of the certified copy of the impugned Final Order No. A/30216/2024 dated 18-03-2024 passed by the Hon’ble CESTAT, Hyderabad in Appeal No. C/30331/2023, and to pass IA NO: 3 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased pleased to stay the operation of impugned Final Order No.30216/2024 dated 18.03.2024 passed by the Hon’ble CESTAT, Hyderabad in Appeal No. C/30331/2023, pending disposal of the main Appeal and to pass Counsel for the Appellant: 1. SANTHI CHANDRA (Sr. Standing Counsel for CBIC) Counsel for the Respondent: 1. G PRAHLAD CENTRAL EXCISE APPEALS NO: 21/2025 Between: 1. THE COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL TAX AND CUSTOMS, CUSTOMS COMMISSIONERATE (PREVENTIVE), D.NO.55-17-3,2ND FLOOR, ROAD NO.2, INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, AUTONAGAR, VIJAYAWADA - 520 007. ...APPELLANT AND 1. ARAVAPALLI VARALAKSHMI, W/o. A Srinivasa Rao, Flat No. 401, Brindavan Gardens Apartment, 1ST Lane, Narasaraopet, Guntur, Andhra Pradesh - 522 601. ...RESPONDENT Pleased to quash and set aside the impugned Final Order No. A/30211/2024 - CU(SM) dated 15-03-2024 passed by the Honble CESTAT, Hyderabad Bench in Appeal No. C/30326/2023, and/ or pass IA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased Pleased to condone the delay of 224 days in filing the instant appeal against the impugned Final Order No. A/30211/2024 CU[SM] dated 15.03.2024 passed by the Hon’ble CESTAT, Hyderabad in Appeal No. C/30326/2023, and to pass IA NO: 2 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased pleased to dispense with filing of the certified copy of the impugned Final Order No. A/30211/2024 CU[SM] dated 15.03.2024 passed by the Hon’ble CESTAT, Hyderabad in Appeal No. C/30326/2023, and to pass IA NO: 3 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased Pleased to stay the operation of impugned Final Order No. A/30211/2024 CU[SM] dated 15.03.2024 passed by the Hon’ble CESTAT, Hyderabad in Appeal No. C/30326/2023, pending disposal of the main Appeal and to pass IA NO: 4 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased may be pleased to condone the delay of 281 days in presenting lA No. of 2025 in CEA No. 21 of 2025 seeking to bring on record the Proposed Petitioner on record as proposed Respondent as legal representative of deceased sole respondent as in the above CEA and pass IA NO: 5 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased may be pleased to set aside the abatement cased due to the death of 1st Vespondent as in the above CEA No. 21 of 2025 and pass IA NO: 6 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased may be pleased to bring me i.e. Proposed Respondent No.2 as a legal representative of the deceased 1st Respondent i.e., Aravapalli Varalakshmi, (died) as Respondent No. 2 in the above CEA No. 21 of 2025 and pass Counsel for the Appellant: 1. SANTHI CHANDRA (Sr. Standing Counsel for CBIC) Counsel for the Respondent: 1. MAHESWARI ARIKA The Court made the following Common Order: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice R.Raghunandan Rao) The Officials of the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (for short ‘the D.R.I. Officers’), based on a tip, intercepted a bus at Venkatachalam Toll Plaza in Nellore District. In the course of a search, made on the passengers, gold was seized from three persons, namely Sri A.Praveen Kumar, Sri T.Prasannanjaneyulu and Sri Kranti Kumar. Proceedings were initiated, against these three persons, and also against another five persons, for violation of the provisions of Customs Act, 1962. These proceedings were initiated on the ground that these three persons were found to be in possession of gold bullion, which had been imported without payment of customs duty, and that the other five persons were also linked to these seizures. The Additional Commissioner of Customs, S.P.S.R. Nellore District, by order dated 28.02.2022 had confiscated the gold recovered from the aforesaid three persons. Apart from this, penalties were also levied on all the eight persons. 2. The aforesaid eight persons, being aggrieved by the said order of the Additional commissioner, filed appeals before the Commissioner of Central Tax and Customs (Appeals), Guntur. These appeals came to be dismissed, on 25.03.2023, by way of separate orders. The aforesaid eight persons had thereupon approached the CESTAT Hyderabad, by way of six separate appeals. These appeals came to be allowed, by way of separate orders. Aggrieved by these orders, the department filed the present set of appeals. 3. Sri C.Srinivas Chethurvedula, learned counsel appearing for Smt. Maheswari Arika, learned counsel and Sri G.Prahlad, learned counsels appearing for respondents raised a preliminary objection, on the maintainability of these appeals. The learned counsel contended that the Central Government has evolved a litigation policy where under the authorities were directed not to file appeals if the value of these appeals did not cross a certain monetary limit. Different monetary limits were fixed for appeals before CESTAT, appeals before the High Court and appeals before the Supreme Court. These limits were revised from time to time. Learned counsel would draw the attention of this Court to the latest fixation of monetary limits, in the instructions issued on 02.11.2023. In these instructions it was stipulated that no appeal which did not cross, the monetary limit of Rs.1,00,00,000/- should be filed before the High Court. Learned counsel would also draw the attention of this Court to instructions, dated 26.12.2014, in which the word “case” was explained in the following terms: “The Instructions mentioned above used the word “case”. However, the same was not defined. The term “case” needs to be interpreted in the context of National Litigation Policy which aims at reduction of litigation. In respect of a composite order which disposes of more than one appeal/SCN and the Department contemplates filing of appeal, every appeal would be a “case” and should be subjected to the threshold limit prescribed. To illustrate, if the Tribunal passes one composite order disposing of more than one appeal filed before it, and if the Department being aggrieved is required to file more than one appeal against the said Tribunal order, then each appeal shall be subject to the monetary limit prescribed.” 4. Learned counsel would contend that the monetary value in all these appeals, except in C.E.A.No.18 of 2025 was below the figure of one crore and as such these appeals would not be maintainable. 5. On the other hand Smt.Santhi Chandra, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the appellant would contend that the seizure of gold was a common incident relating to all the three persons and as such the value of all the appeals should be taken into account and as such the aggregate of the values of all the appeals should be taken for deciding whether the monetary limit has been reached or not. She would contend that merely because separate appeals have been filed, the values in each of the appeals cannot be taken separately to hold that the appeals are barred. 6. The details of the value of each of the appeal is given below: S.No. Order in Appeal No. C.E.A.No. Gold Gold Value Penalty Name Total 1. 099 18 3304.560 grams 1,40,87,339/- 35,00,000/- A.Praveen Kumar 1,75,87,339/- 2. 098 21 - - 15,00,000/- A.Varalakshmi 15,00,000/- 3. 101 15 - - 15,00,000/- A.Srinivasa Rao 15,00,000/- 4. 097 16 1004.16 grams 43,24,415/- 10,00,000/- Vemula Kranthi 53,24,415/- 5. 100 17 - - 20,00,000/- Pachipulusu V.J. 20,00,000/- 6. 96 19 1152.21 49,61,992/- 10,00,000/- T.Prasannanjaneyulu 59,61,992/- Total 2,33,73,746/- 1,05,00,000/- 7. The table, set out above, makes it clear that it is only C.E.A.No.18 of 2025 which would be above the monetary limit fixed in the instructions of 02.11.2023. The contention of the learned Standing Counsel, that the values in all the appeals should be taken into account, cannot be accepted in view of the clarification given in the instructions, dated 26.12.2014. 8. In such circumstances it would have to be held that C.E.A.Nos.15 to 17 and 19 and 21 of 2025 are not maintainable as they do not meet the monetary limits set out in the instructions dated 02.11.2023. 9. Accordingly, these appeals are dismissed. ________________________ R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO, J ________________ T.C.D.SEKHAR, J Date: 27.01.2026 M K K 215 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE R RAGHUNANDAN RAO THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE T.C.D.SEKHAR CENTRAL EXCISE APPEALS NOS: 15, 16, 17, 19 and 21 of 2025 (per Hon’ble Sri Justice R Raghunandan Rao) 27.01.2026 M K K