Commissioner Of Central GST And Central Excise , J And K vs. Nitin Enterprises

Held

The Court decided to issue notice to show cause as to why the appeal (CEA No. 10/2018) should not be admitted for hearing, acknowledging that the issue is pending in LPAOW No. 123/2011 and referencing a Supreme Court order. Regarding the interim relief, the Court directed that subject to the appellant (Commissioner of GST and Central Excise, J&K) releasing 50% of the amount due to the respondent (Nitin Enterprises) in terms of the impugned judgment dated 20th March, 2018, passed by the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, and upon furnishing a solvent surety to the satisfaction of the Jurisdictional Commissioner within four weeks of furnishing such surety, the operation of the impugned judgment shall be stayed with regard to the remaining amount claimed as refunded by the respondent. The Court did not decide on the merits of the appeal itself at this stage, only on the admission and interim directions.

Facts

This matter involves a writ petition (MCC No. 256/2018) and a civil execution appeal (CEA No. 10/2018) before the High Court of Jammu and Kashmir. In MCC No. 256/2018, an application for dispensing with the certified copy of the impugned order was allowed. In CEA No. 10/2018, the Commissioner of GST and Central Excise, J&K, is the appellant, and Nitin Enterprises is the respondent. The appeal concerns an issue that is also under consideration in LPAOW No. 123/2011. An interim order was previously issued in favour of the revenue in this appeal, relying on a Supreme Court order. The Court issued notice to show cause why the appeal should not be admitted. An interim direction was also given regarding the release of 50% of the amount due to the respondent entrepreneur, subject to furnishing solvent surety for the remaining amount claimed as refund.

Key Issues

1. Whether the appeal (CEA No. 10/2018) should be admitted for hearing, considering the pendency of a similar issue in LPAOW No. 123/2011 and the Supreme Court's order in Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No. 28194-28201/2010. 2. Whether the impugned judgment dated 20th March, 2018, passed by the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, should be stayed with respect to the remaining amount claimed as refunded by the respondent, subject to certain conditions. Petitioner/Appellant (Commissioner of GST and Central Excise, J&K) Arguments: The petitioner submitted that the issue in the present appeal is subject to consideration in LPAOW No. 123/2011 and that an interim order was previously issued in favour of the revenue based on a Supreme Court order. The petitioner sought admission of the appeal and a stay on the remaining refund amount. Respondent (Nitin Enterprises) Arguments: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the respondent at this stage, other than implicitly seeking the release of the refund amount as per the Tribunal's order.