Commissioner Of Central GST And Central Excise J And K Jammu vs. M/S Emcure Pharmaceuticals LTD Sidco Industrial Complex Bari Brahmana Jammu
Facts
The Commissioner of Central CGST and Central Excise, Jammu (Petitioner/Appellant) filed an appeal against M/s Emcure Pharmaceuticals Ltd. (Respondent). The appeal concerned an unspecified tax period and an unspecified order or action passed by an unspecified authority. The amount in dispute was not stated. The procedural history indicates this appeal is identical to several other Excise Appeals previously considered and decided by the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh. The leading case among those was CEA No. 10 of 2020, decided on May 23, 2022. The present appeal was filed in 2022.
Held
The Court held that the present appeal is squarely covered by its previous judgment and order dated May 23, 2022, passed in CEA No. 10 of 2020 and connected appeals. The reasoning was that the appellant had not presented any new grounds for consideration, making the matter identical to the previously decided cases. The Court found no new legal or factual aspects that warranted a different decision. The ratio decidendi is that appeals raising identical issues and grounds, without any new material or arguments, are bound by prior judgments of the same court. The operative direction was to dismiss the appeal on the same terms and conditions as laid down in the prior judgment. No issues were expressly left undecided.
Key Issues
1. Whether the present appeal is covered by the previous judgment and order dated May 23, 2022, passed in CEA No. 10 of 2020 and connected appeals, given that the appellant has not raised any new grounds. This is a question of law and fact. Petitioner/Appellant's Argument: The petitioner/appellant argued that the appeal is identical to several other Excise Appeals previously decided by the Court and that no new grounds are available for consideration. They implicitly relied on the principle of stare decisis and the binding nature of previous judgments on similar matters. Respondent's Argument: No arguments were recorded from the respondent's side as they were represented by 'None'.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORDER
This appeal is similar and identical to the several other Excise Appeals which have been considered and decided by this Court vide judgment and order dated 23rd May 2022 wherein CEA No.10 of 2020 was the leading case.
Having heard counsel for the parties, we are of the opinion that as no new ground is available to the appellant, the matter stands squarely covered by the above decision.
Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed on the same terms and conditions as laid down in the judgment and order dated 23rd May, 2022 passed in CEA No.10 of 2022 and connected appeals.
(M.A. Chowdhary) (Sindhu Sharma)
Judge
Judge
Jammu 28.11.2022 Michal Sharma
2
WP(C) No. ------
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.