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

Held

The Court decided to issue notice to the respondents to show cause as to why the appeal should not be admitted to hearing. In the meantime, the Court directed that the payment of the balance amount due in terms of the impugned CESTAT judgment dated March 23, 2018, shall remain stayed, subject to the appellant (revenue) releasing 50% of the amount due to the respondent (assessee) on furnishing solvent surety to the satisfaction of the Jurisdictional Commissioner within four weeks of furnishing such surety. The appeal is to be listed along with CEA 09/2018. The Court has not yet decided on the admission of the appeal itself.

Facts

This matter concerns an appeal filed by the Commissioner of Central GST and Central Excise, J&K, Jammu (the appellant/revenue) against an order dated March 23, 2018, passed by the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT). The appeal is filed by the revenue against Hardcastle Petrofer Pvt. Ltd. (the respondent/assessee). The CESTAT order pertains to multiple appeal numbers, including E/51135/2015 to E/51138/2015, E/51140/2015 to E/51142/2015, E/51144/2015 to E/51146/2015, E/54918/2014 to E/54920/2014, E/54922/2014 to E/54938/2014, and E/60296/2016 to E/60300/2016. The High Court is considering whether to admit the appeal for hearing and has issued interim directions.

Key Issues

1. Whether the appeal filed by the revenue against the CESTAT order dated March 23, 2018, should be admitted for hearing? (Question of law). The appellant (revenue) relies on an earlier order passed by this Court in CEA No. 09/2018, where notice was issued to show cause as to why the appeal should not be admitted and interim directions were also issued. The appellant argues that the present appeal should be treated similarly. The respondent (assessee) has not recorded any arguments in the judgment.