Commissioner Of Central GST And Central Excise , J And K vs. Biostadt INDIA Limited
Held
The Court decided to stay the impugned order dated March 14, 2018. The reasoning was based on the appellant's submission that a similar issue was pending before a Coordinate Bench in CEA No. 77/2018, and an order had been passed therein on December 4, 2018. The Court granted interim relief by directing the appellant to release only 50% of the amount due to the respondent. This release was made conditional upon the respondent furnishing solvent surety for the released amount, to the satisfaction of the Jurisdictional Commissioner, within four weeks. The Court also noted that the requirement of providing a certified copy of the impugned order was dispensed with in MCC No. 352/2018. The Court did not decide the ultimate merits of the case, as it was an interim order pending further proceedings and the decision in the similar pending case.
Facts
This case involves two connected matters before the High Court of Jammu and Kashmir at Jammu: MCC No. 352/2018 and CEA No. 85/2018. In CEA No. 85/2018, the appellant, Commissioner of Central GST and Central Excise, J&K, is challenging an order dated March 14, 2018. The appellant's counsel stated that a similar issue is pending before the Court in CEA No. 77/2018, where a Coordinate Bench had passed an order on December 4, 2018. The appellant sought a similar order in the present appeal. The respondent, Biostadt India Ltd., waived notice. The Court issued a notice and directed objections to be filed. In the interim, the impugned order dated March 14, 2018, was stayed. The appellant was directed to release only 50% of the amount due to the respondent, contingent upon the respondent furnishing solvent surety for that amount.
Key Issues
1. Whether the impugned order dated March 14, 2018, should be stayed pending the decision of a similar issue pending before this Court in CEA No. 77/2018. Arguments: Petitioner/Appellant (Commissioner of Central GST and Central Excise, J&K): The appellant argued that a similar issue is pending before the Court in CEA No. 77/2018, and a Coordinate Bench had passed an order in that case on December 4, 2018. They requested a similar order be passed in the present appeal. Respondent (Biostadt India Ltd.): The respondent waived notice. No specific arguments were recorded for the respondent regarding the stay or the merits of the case at this stage.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Regular List Case No. 15 HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AT JAMMU c/w Date of Order: 17.12.2018
Commissioner of Central GST and Central Excise, J&K Vs Biostadt India Ltd. Coram:
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dhiraj Singh Thakur, Judge
Hon’ble Mrs. Justice Sindhu Sharma, Judge
For the appellant(s)/petitioner(s) : Mr. Jagpaul Singh, Advocate. For the respondent(s) :
For the reasons stated in the application, which is supported by an affidavit, the same is allowed. Requirement of providing a certified copy of the impugned order is dispensed with.
Learned counsel for the appellant states that a similar issue is pending before the Court in CEA No. 77/2018, in which a Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 04.12.2018 has passed the order. It is submitted that a similar order be passed in the instant appeal as well.
Notice. Mr. Anchit Sharma, Advocate waives notice on behalf of the respondent. Objections be filed by or before the next date.
In the meantime, order impugned dated 14th of March, 2018 is stayed. The appellan
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.