Principal Commissioner Of CGST And Central Excise J And K Jammu vs. Hyderabad Chemicals LTD Sidco Industrial Complex Bari Brahmana Jammu
Facts
The Principal Commissioner of CGST and Central Excise, J&K, filed an appeal before the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh against an order dated 06.03.2018 passed by CESTAT Chandigarh. The appellant's counsel conceded that a similar issue had been decided by a Division Bench of the High Court in a previous appeal, CEA No. 10/2020. The present appeal was therefore considered on the basis of the precedent set in the earlier case.
Held
The Court held that the appeal in hand, CEA No. 136/2023, is identical in its core issue to the appeal previously decided by a Division Bench of the same Court in CEA No. 10/2020. The Court noted that the appellant's counsel fairly submitted that the issue in the present appeal had arisen in CEA No. 10/2020, which was dismissed by the Division Bench. Consequently, the Court found that the reasoning and decision in CEA No. 10/2020 applied on all fours to the present appeal. The ratio decidendi is that where a High Court has decided a similar issue in a prior appeal, and the appellant concedes to this fact, the subsequent appeal will be dismissed following the precedent. The operative direction was to dismiss the appeal.
Key Issues
1. Whether the principles laid down by the Division Bench of this Court in CEA No. 10/2020, dated 23.05.2022, apply to the present appeal (CEA No. 136/2023)? Petitioner's contention: The petitioner (Principal Commissioner of CGST and Central Excise) acknowledged that the issue in the present appeal is identical to that decided in CEA No. 10/2020 and that the Division Bench had dismissed that appeal. Therefore, the petitioner implicitly accepted that the decision in the earlier case would govern the present one. Respondent's contention: The respondent (SDS Ramcides Crop Science Pvt. Ltd.) did not present any arguments as the appeal was dismissed based on the petitioner's concession and the precedent from CEA No. 10/2020.
Sections Cited
Section 35G
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORDER 15.11.2023
The present appeal being CEA No. 135 of 2023 filed by the Commissioner of Central GST & Central Excise (J&K) Jammu filed under Section 35 G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 against the final order dated 06.03.2018 passed by CESTAT Chandigarh. Learned counsel for the appellant/applicant fairly submits that the similar issue had arisen in an appeal bearing CEA No. 10/2020, but the Division Bench of this Court dismissed the appeal. In view of the above, what has been said by the Division Bench of this Court in order dated 23.05.2022 passed in CEA No. 10/2020 applies on all fours to the appeal in hand. Accordingly, the appeal bearing No. CEA No. 136 of 2023 is dismissed.
(MOKSHA KHAJURIA KAZMI) (N. KOTISWAR SINGH)
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 High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.