Commissioner vs. Anil Goel, Director Kmg Rolling (P) LTD.

Held

The Court held that the present appeal should be disposed of in the same terms as the order dated 29.06.2026 passed by a Co-ordinate Bench. This order was based on the observation that the questions of law in the present appeals were subject to examination by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in SLP (Civil) No.5392/2025 - Union of India & Ors. Vs. GMR Airport Infrastructure Limited. The Supreme Court had indicated that hearings in similar matters before Tribunals or High Courts might be deferred until it took an appropriate call. Consequently, the High Court was of the firm view that the appeals could be disposed of with the observation that the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in GMR Infrastructure Limited would apply mutatis mutandis. Interim orders were directed to continue to operate, subject to the final outcome of the aforementioned SLP. The appeal was accordingly disposed of.

Facts

The appeal was filed by the Commissioner, Central Excise and CGST-Alwar (Appellant) against an order dated 25.11.2025 passed by the CESTAT, which had set aside an Order-in-Original dated 25.11.2024. The respondent is Anil Goel, Director of Kmg Rolling (P) Ltd. The dispute concerns tax matters, though the specific tax period and amount in dispute are not detailed in the provided text. The procedural history involves the CESTAT setting aside an earlier order, leading to the present appeal before the High Court. The High Court noted a similar matter before a Co-ordinate Bench.

Key Issues

1. Whether the present appeal should be disposed of in terms of the order passed by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in D.B. Central/excise Appeal No. 13/2025 and other connected matters, which in turn relied on observations made by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.5392/2025 - Union of India & Ors. Vs. GMR Airport Infrastructure Limited. Petitioner's Argument: The learned counsel for the respective parties jointly submitted that the instant appeal be disposed of in the same terms as the order dated 29.06.2026 passed in connected matters. Revenue's Argument: The Revenue (Appellant) did not present any distinct arguments against this course of action, having agreed to the joint submission for disposal in terms of the co-ordinate bench's order.