Commissioner Of Central GST And Central Excise , J And K vs. Hardcastle Petrofer PVT. LTD.

Held

The Court has allowed the application for dispensing with the filing of the certified copy of the impugned order. Regarding CEA No. 40/2018, the Court has issued notice to the respondent (Hardcastle Petrofer Pvt. Ltd.) to show cause as to why the appeal should not be admitted to hearing. In the interim, the Court has directed that subject to the appellant (Commissioner of Central GST and Central Excise, J&K) releasing 50% of the amount due in terms of the impugned CESTAT judgment dated March 23, 2018, upon furnishing solvent surety to the satisfaction of the Jurisdictional Commissioner within four weeks, the payment of the balance amount shall remain stayed. The appeals are to be listed along with CEA 09/2018. The Court has not yet decided on the admission of the appeal or the final outcome of the dispute.

Facts

This matter concerns appeals filed by the Commissioner of Central GST and Central Excise, J&K against an order dated March 23, 2018, passed by the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT). The appeals are filed under CEA No. 40/2018 and related applications. The petitioner (Commissioner) is seeking to challenge the CESTAT's decision. The respondent is Hardcastle Petrofer Pvt. Ltd. The High Court is considering whether to admit the appeals for hearing. As an interim measure, the Court has directed the appellant to release 50% of the amount due as per the impugned CESTAT judgment, subject to furnishing solvent surety, with the payment of the balance amount to remain stayed.

Key Issues

1. Whether the appeal filed by the Commissioner of Central GST and Central Excise, J&K against the order of the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) dated March 23, 2018, should be admitted for hearing. The appellant (Commissioner) relies on an earlier order of this Court in CEA No. 09/2018, where notice was issued for admission and interim directions were granted. The respondent (Hardcastle Petrofer Pvt. Ltd.) has not recorded arguments in this excerpt. The Court is to decide whether to admit the appeal. 2. What interim directions should be issued pending the admission and final disposal of the appeal. The appellant seeks a stay on the payment of the balance amount due under the CESTAT order, while the respondent's stance on this is not recorded. The Court is considering the terms of any interim relief.