Commissioner Of Central Excise Chd-I, Chandigarh vs. M/S Paul Merchants LTD.
Original PDF →Facts
The Commissioner of Central Excise, Chandigarh-I (appellant) filed an appeal against an order dated 19.02.2019 passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Chandigarh. The respondent is M/s Paul Merchants Ltd. The appeal was filed before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana. The appellant is challenging the decision of the CESTAT. The procedural history involves the CESTAT passing an order which is now under challenge before the High Court.
Held
The Court held that in terms of Section 35(g) of the Central Excise Act, 1944, an appeal would not lie to the High Court, but only to the Hon'ble Supreme Court. This decision was based on previous Division Bench judgments of the same High Court in cases like CGST Panchkula vs. Nestle India Ltd. and Commissioner of Central Excise Delhi vs. M/s Evalueserve.com Pvt. Ltd. The reasoning is that the statutory provision dictates the appellate forum. The ratio decidendi is that appeals from CESTAT under Section 35(g) of the Central Excise Act, 1944, are exclusively maintainable before the Supreme Court. Consequently, the present appeal before the High Court was dismissed, with liberty granted to the appellant to file an appeal before the Hon'ble Supreme Court.
Key Issues
1. Does an appeal lie before the High Court against an order passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) in terms of Section 35(g) of the Central Excise Act, 1944? The appellant argued that the High Court has jurisdiction to hear the appeal. The respondent's arguments are not recorded in the judgment. The Court had to decide whether the High Court was the correct forum for the appeal, based on the provisions of the Central Excise Act, 1944.
Sections Cited
Section 35(g)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
STA-05-2013 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 204-A STA-05-2013 (O&M) Date of decision:- 23.05.2024 Commissioner of Central Excise Chd-I, Chandigarh ....Appellant vs. M/s Paul Merchants Ltd. ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA Present: Mr. Sunish Bindlish, Sr. Standing counsel with Mr. Vinay Kumar, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. Amar Pratap Singh, Advocate for the respondent. *** SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA, J. (Oral)
By way of the present appeal, the appellant assails the order dated 19.02.2019 passed by the Custom Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh.
This Court in the case of Principal Commissioner CGST, Gurugram v/s M/s Hitachi Metal India Pvt. Ltd., decided on 08.05.2024, passed in STA-14-2021 relying upon Division Bench Ltd in STA-26-2019, decided on 15.02.2023 and Commissioner of Central Excise Delhi vs M/s Evalueserve.com Pvt. Ltd in STA-13- 2021, decided on 15.12.2023 has held that in terms of Section 35(g) of Gaurav Arora 2024.05.28 16:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
STA-05-2013 2 the Central Excise Act, 1944, appeal would not lie to the High Court and would only lie to Hon’ble the Supreme Court. Thus, the liberty was granted to the appellant to file an appeal before Hon’ble the Supreme Court.
In view of the above judgment, the present appeal is also dismissed with a liberty to the appellant to file an appeal before Hon’ble the Supreme Court.
All pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. (SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA) JUDGE May 23, 2024 (SUDEEPTI SHARMA) G Arora JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No Gaurav Arora 2024.05.28 16:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
Reproduced from the public record of the Punjab and Haryana High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.