Commissioner Of CGST And Central Excise Commissionerate vs. M/S Controls And Switchgear Co LTD

CEXA/25/2017HC UttarakhandGSTCNR UKHC01013548201723 February 2018Bench: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE1 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

Held

The Court held that the appeal is not maintainable. This decision was based on the precedent set in Central Excise Appeal No. 10 of 2015 and connected cases, decided on April 5, 2017. The reasoning for this finding is not elaborated beyond referencing the prior judgment. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed as not maintainable. The appellant was granted liberty to pursue the matter before the competent forum if advised. No costs were awarded. The specific issue of the merits of the underlying dispute, if any, was not decided.

Facts

The appellant, Commissioner of CGST & Central Excise, Dehradun, filed Central Excise Appeal No. 25 of 2017 against M/s Controls & Switchgear Co. Ltd. The appeal was filed before the High Court of Uttarakhand at Nainital. The specific tax period and the order or action under challenge are not detailed in the provided judgment. The procedural history indicates that the appeal was heard by a Division Bench of the High Court. The amount in dispute is not stated.

Key Issues

1. Whether the Central Excise Appeal No. 25 of 2017 is maintainable before this Court? The appellant argued that the appeal should be heard on merits. The respondent did not present any arguments as recorded in the judgment. The Court's decision was based on a previous judgment in Central Excise Appeal No. 10 of 2015 and connected cases, decided on April 5, 2017, which presumably dealt with the maintainability of such appeals.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL

Central Excise Appeal No. 25 of 2017

Commissioner of CGST & Central Excise Commissionrate, Dehradun

.………. Appellant

Versus

M/s Controls & Switchgear Co. Ltd. ...………. Respondent

Mr. Shobhit Saharia, Advocate for the appellant.

Dated: 23rd February, 2018

Coram: Hon’ble K.M. Joseph, C.J. Hon’ble Sharad Kumar Sharma, J.

K.M. JOSEPH, C.J. (Oral)

Having heard the learned Senior Standing Counsel for the appellants Mr. Shobhit Saharia, we are of the view that this Appeal is to be held to be not maintainable following our judgment in Central Excise Appeal No. 10 of 2015 and connected cases, decided on 5th April, 2017. 2. Consequently, the Appeal will stand dismissed as not maintainable. Needless to say, the appellant will be at liberty to pursue the matter before the competent forum, if advised. There will be no order as to costs.

(Sharad Kumar Sharma, J.) (K.M. Joseph, C.J.) 23.02.2018

23.02.

2018 Rahul

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.

See plans and prices

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 Uttarakhand High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.