Principal Commissioner Central Goods And Services Tax Gurugram vs. M/S Munjal Showa LTD
Facts
The Principal Commissioner of Central Tax, Gurugram, filed an appeal before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana against the final order No. 61077/2017-CU (DB) dated 15.06.2017, passed by the Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Chandigarh. The appeal was filed with a delay of 767 days, which was condoned by the court. The appellant is the revenue authority and the respondent is M/s Munjal Showa Ltd. The appeal concerns a dispute related to the taxability of service under the Central Excise Act, 1944, and the Finance Act. The judgment notes that a similar appeal, STA-16-2022, arising from the same CESTAT order, was dismissed by the High Court on 05.12.2022.
Held
The Court held that it does not have the exclusive jurisdiction to entertain an appeal against an order of the Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) that is relatable to the taxability of service under Section 35L of the Central Excise Act, 1944, read with Section 83 of the Finance Act. The Court's reasoning is based on its previous order dated 05.12.2022 in STA-16-2022, where it was stated that only the Hon'ble Supreme Court would have exclusive jurisdiction in such matters. Therefore, the present appeal was dismissed. The appellant-department was granted liberty to avail of its alternative remedy against the impugned order in accordance with law. No specific amount in dispute was mentioned, nor were any specific tax periods discussed. The judgment did not expressly leave any issue undecided.
Key Issues
1. Whether the High Court has the jurisdiction to entertain an appeal against an order of the CESTAT relatable to the taxability of service under Section 35L of the Central Excise Act, 1944, read with Section 83 of the Finance Act? The petitioner (appellant) argued that the High Court should entertain the appeal. The respondent (M/s Munjal Showa Ltd.) did not present any arguments as recorded in the judgment. The judgment relies on a previous order passed by the same High Court in a similar appeal (STA-16-2022) which addressed the jurisdictional question.
Sections Cited
Section 35L, Section 83
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
STA-
15 -20
22 (O&M)
-1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
STA-15-2022 (O&M)
Date of decision: 03.02.2023 Principal Commissioner, Central Goods and Services Tax, Gurugram
...Petitioner Vs. M/s Munjal Showa Ltd. ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Present: Mr. Sourabh Goel, Advocate, for the appellant. Mr. Amrinder Singh, Advocate, for the respondent. *** Ritu Bahri, J. (oral) CM-5261-CII-2022
For the reasons mentioned in the application, same is allowed and delay of 767 days in filing of the appeal is condoned. STA-15-2022 The present appeal has been filed against the final order No.61077/2017-CU (DB) dated 15.06.2017 (Annexure A-13), passed by the Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Chandigarh. Learned counsel for the parties have stated that the appeal i.e. STA-16-2022 (Principal Commissioner of Central Tax vs. M/s Munjal Showa Ltd.) arising out of order dated 15.06.2017 has been dismissed by this Court vide order dated 05.12.2022 with liberty to the appellant to avail of its appropriate remedy in accordance with law. The said appeal was AJAY PRASHER 2023.02.0
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
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.