Commissioner Of CGST And Central Excise Jammu vs. Nanda Mint And Pine Chemicals LTD
Facts
The Commissioner of CGST and Central Excise, Jammu, filed an appeal under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1994, against an order passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT). The CESTAT had set aside orders of lower authorities and directed a refund of Education Cess and Secondary & Higher Education Cess to the respondent, Nanda Mint and Pine Chemicals Limited. This direction was based on the Supreme Court's decision in M/s SRD Nutrients Pvt. Ltd. V. Commissioner of Central Excise, Guwahati. A batch of similar appeals, including the lead case CEA No. 10/2022, had previously been dismissed by a Coordinate Bench of the High Court on May 23, 2022. The present appeal raised similar grounds to those already decided.
Held
The Court held that the present appeal raised grounds identical to those considered and decided in a previous batch of appeals by a Coordinate Bench of the High Court, which were dismissed vide judgment dated May 23, 2022. To maintain parity and consistency, the Court dismissed the instant appeal on the same terms and conditions as laid down in the prior judgment. Any interim directions that were subsisting were vacated. The ratio decidendi is that appeals with identical grounds to those previously decided by a coordinate bench should be decided consistently with the prior judgment, upholding the principle of judicial discipline and precedent. The operative direction was the dismissal of the appeal.
Key Issues
1. Whether the present appeal, raising grounds identical to those decided in a previous batch of appeals by a Coordinate Bench of this Court, should be dismissed on the same terms. Petitioner's Argument (Commissioner of CGST and Central Excise, Jammu): The petitioner argued that the CESTAT's order directing the refund of Education Cess and Secondary & Higher Education Cess was contrary to established principles, and that the grounds raised in this appeal were identical to those in a previous batch of appeals dismissed by the Court. They relied on the principle of maintaining parity with prior judgments. Respondent's Argument (Nanda Mint and Pine Chemicals Limited): No arguments were recorded for the respondent as they were represented by 'None'.
Sections Cited
Section 35G
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Serial No. 09 Regular Cause List
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU
CEA No. 326/2022 CM Nos. 6627/2022; 6628/2022
Commissioner of CGST and Central Excise Jammu … Appellant(s)
Through: - Mr Jagpaul Singh, Advocate.
V/s
Nanda Mint and Pine Chemicals Limited … Respondent(s) Through: - None.
CORAM:
Hon’ble the Chief Justice
Hon’ble Mr Justice Vinod Chatterji Koul, Judge
(ORDER) 21.11.2022
Ali Mohammad Magrey-CJ (Oral):
At the very outset, what requires to be stated is that a batch of appeals were filed before this Court by the Commissioner, Central, GST and Central Excise (Jammu and Kashmir), Jammu under Section 35 G of the Central Excise Act, 1994 (fort short ‘the Act’) against the orders of different dates passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh (for short ‘the CESTAT’), thereby setting aside the orders passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) and the Adjudicating Authority and directing for the refund of the Education Cess and Secondary & Higher Education Cess to the assessee in view of the decision rendered by the Apex Court in ca
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.