Commissioner Of Central GST And Central Excise , J And K vs. Hardcastle Petrofer PVT. LTD.
Held
The Court allowed the application for dispensation of filing the certified copy of the impugned order. Regarding the admission of the appeal, the Court issued notice to the respondents, directing them to show cause as to why the appeal should not be admitted to hearing, referencing an earlier order in CEA No. 09/2018. As an interim measure, the Court directed that subject to the appellant releasing 50% of the amount due as per the CESTAT's impugned judgment, and furnishing solvent surety to the satisfaction of the Jurisdictional Commissioner within four weeks of furnishing such surety, the payment of the balance amount shall remain stayed. The appeal was listed along with CEA 09/2018.
Facts
This matter involves an appeal by the Commissioner of Central GST and Central Excise, J&K, Jammu, against an order passed by the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) on March 23, 2018. The appeal pertains to multiple CESTAT appeal numbers, including E/51135/2015 to E/51146/2015, E/54918/2014 to E/54938/2014, and E/60296/2016 to E/60300/2016. The petitioner sought dispensation of filing a certified copy of the impugned order, which was allowed. The High Court was asked to consider admitting the appeal to hearing and issued interim directions regarding the payment of the disputed amount.
Key Issues
1. Whether the appeal filed by the Commissioner of Central GST and Central Excise, J&K, Jammu, should be admitted to hearing, considering the reliance placed on an earlier order of this Court in CEA No. 09/2018 where notice was issued. The petitioner argued for admission based on the precedent set in CEA No. 09/2018. The respondent's arguments are not recorded in the judgment. 2. What interim directions should be issued pending the admission of the appeal. The petitioner sought a stay on the payment of the amount due in terms of the CESTAT's impugned judgment. The respondent's stance on interim relief is not recorded.
Sections Cited
Not specified
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
__________________________________________________________________________________ MCC No. 307/2018 Regular list Item No.11 HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AT JAMMU
MCC No. 307/2018 c/w CEA No. 53/2018, IA No. 01/2018
Date of order: 28.11.2018 Commissioner of Central GST and Central; Excise, J&K, Jammu Vs. Hardcastle Petrofer Pvt. Ltd. Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL, JUDGE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE TASHI RABSTAN, JUDGE Appearing counsel(s): For Petitioner/Appellant(s) : Mr. Jagpaul Singh, Advocate For respondent (s) :
MCC NO. 307/2018
For the reasons stated in the application, which is supported by an affidavit, the same is allowed. Accordingly, filing of the certified copy of the impugned order is dispensed with. CEA No. 53/2018 Learned counsel for the appellant places reliance on an earlier order passed by this Court in CEA No. 09/2018, in which notice has been
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.