Commissioner Of CGST And Central Excise Jammu vs. M/S Shiva Mint Industries Birpur Industrial Estate Bari Brahmana Jammu

Facts

The Commissioner of CGST and Central Excise, Jammu (Appellant) filed an appeal before the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh 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 the refund of Education Cess and Secondary & Higher Education Cess to the respondent, M/s Shiva Mint Industries. This decision was based on the Supreme 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, including the lead case CEA No. 10/2022, had been dismissed by a Coordinate Bench of the High Court on May 23, 2022. The present appeal was filed under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1994.

Held

The High Court dismissed the appeal filed by the Commissioner of CGST and Central Excise, Jammu. The Court observed that the present appeal was filed against a CESTAT order that was similar to the orders challenged in a batch of previous appeals. These previous appeals, which were based on identical grounds and also relied on the Supreme Court's decision in M/s SRD Nutrients Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Guwahati, had been dismissed by a Coordinate Bench of the High Court on May 23, 2022. To maintain parity and consistency with its earlier decision, the Court decided to dismiss the instant appeal on the same terms and conditions as laid down in the judgment dated May 23, 2022. Any subsisting interim directions were also vacated. The ratio decidendi is that appeals filed on identical grounds, relying on the same precedent, and against similar orders that have already been dismissed by a coordinate bench of the same High Court, should be dismissed to maintain judicial discipline and consistency.

Key Issues

1. Whether the present appeal, challenging an order of the CESTAT directing refund of Education Cess and Secondary & Higher Education Cess based on the Supreme Court's decision in M/s SRD Nutrients Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Guwahati, is maintainable and ought to be decided on merits, or if it is barred by the principle of res judicata or parity due to a prior judgment of a Coordinate Bench of this Court dismissing similar appeals on identical grounds. The Appellant contended that the appeal should be considered on its own merits. The Respondent did not appear before the Court. The Court noted that the instant appeal was filed on almost identical grounds as a batch of previous appeals that were dismissed by a Coordinate Bench of the High Court on May 23, 2022, which relied on the Apex Court's decision in M/s SRD Nutrients Pvt. Ltd. The Court considered the need to maintain parity with its previous judgment.