Commissioner Of CGST And Central Excise Jammu vs. M/S Emcure Pharmaceuticals LTD Sidco Industrial Complex Bari Brahmana Jammu

Facts

The Commissioner of CGST and Central Excise, Jammu (Appellant) filed an appeal against an order passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT). The CESTAT had set aside orders passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) and the Adjudicating Authority, directing a refund of Education Cess and Secondary & Higher Education Cess to M/s Emcure Pharmaceuticals Ltd. (Respondent). This decision was based on the Apex Court's ruling in 'M/s SRD Nutrients Pvt. Ltd. V. Commissioner of Central Excise, Guwahati'. A batch of similar appeals filed by the Commissioner had previously been dismissed by a Coordinate Bench of this Court on May 23, 2022. The present appeal raised similar grounds and challenged a similar CESTAT order.

Held

The Court dismissed the appeal filed by the Commissioner of CGST and Central Excise, Jammu. The Court noted that the present appeal was filed against a CESTAT order that was similar to those considered in a batch of earlier appeals. These earlier appeals, which were filed on almost identical grounds, had been dismissed by a Coordinate Bench of this Court on May 23, 2022. To maintain parity and consistency, the Court decided to dismiss the instant appeal on the same terms and conditions as laid down in the previous judgment. Any interim directions that were subsisting were also vacated. The ratio decidendi is that appeals raising identical issues and grounds, which have already been decided by a coordinate bench of the same High Court, should be dismissed on the same basis to ensure judicial discipline and consistency.

Key Issues

1. Whether the CESTAT's order directing the refund of Education Cess and Secondary & Higher Education Cess to the respondent is legally sustainable, considering the Apex Court's decision in M/s SRD Nutrients Pvt. Ltd. V. Commissioner of Central Excise, Guwahati (2017)? Contentions of the Appellant (Commissioner of CGST and Central Excise, Jammu): The appellant argued that the CESTAT's order was erroneous and should be set aside. They relied on the fact that a coordinate bench of this court had already dismissed similar appeals on identical grounds and with similar facts. The appellant sought to maintain parity with the previous judgment. Contentions of the Respondent (M/s Emcure Pharmaceuticals Ltd.): The judgment records no specific arguments made by the respondent. However, the CESTAT's order, which the appellant is challenging, directed the refund of Education Cess and Secondary & Higher Education Cess to the respondent based on the SRD Nutrients judgment.