Commissioner Of Central GST And Central Excise J And K Jammu vs. Jmw INDIA PVT LTD Sidco Industrial Complex Bari Brqahmana Jammu J And K

Facts

The Commissioner of Central GST and Central Excise (J&K) Jammu filed an appeal under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944, against an order dated March 6, 2018, passed by CESTAT Chandigarh. The appeal was delayed by 1829 days, and an application for condonation of delay was filed. The appellant's counsel submitted that a similar issue arose in CEA No. 10/2020, where the High Court dismissed the appeal as barred by limitation. Furthermore, the Supreme Court had also dismissed a Special Leave Petition (Civil) Diary No(s). 18051/2023, titled 'Commissioner of CGST and Central Excise (J&K) versus M/s Saraswati Agro Chemicals Pvt. Ltd.', on similar grounds.

Held

The Court held that the appeal filed by the Commissioner of Central GST and Central Excise (J&K) Jammu was barred by limitation. The Court noted that a similar issue had arisen in CEA No. 10/2020, where the Division Bench of the High Court had dismissed the appeal as barred by limitation. Furthermore, the Supreme Court had also dismissed a Special Leave Petition (Civil) Diary No(s). 18051/2023, concerning a similar matter, on grounds that aligned with the High Court's reasoning in previous cases. The Supreme Court's operative part, reproduced in the judgment, emphasized that decisions that had attained finality based on prevailing Supreme Court judgments (like SRD Nutrients) should not be reopened based on subsequent overruling decisions (like Unicorn Industries), to avoid opening a 'pandora's box' and to ensure finality in litigation, which is against public policy. Applying these principles, the High Court found that the present appeal was also barred by limitation. Consequently, the appeal and connected applications were dismissed.

Key Issues

1. Whether the appeal filed by the Commissioner of Central GST and Central Excise (J&K) Jammu is barred by limitation, considering the delay of 1829 days and the grounds for condonation presented. Petitioner's Arguments: The petitioner, Commissioner of Central GST and Central Excise (J&K) Jammu, sought condonation of delay in filing the appeal. They relied on the fact that similar issues had been dealt with in previous cases before the High Court (CEA No. 10/2020) and the Supreme Court (SLP Diary No(s). 18051/2023), where appeals were dismissed as barred by limitation. The petitioner implicitly argued that the grounds for delay were justifiable, though the judgment does not explicitly detail these grounds beyond referencing prior similar applications. Respondent's Arguments: No specific arguments were recorded for the respondent, JMW India Pvt. Ltd., as the judgment focuses on the appellant's submissions and the court's decision regarding the delay.