Commissioner Of CGST And Central Excise Jammu vs. Jay Ambey Aromatics Sidco Industrial Complex Jammu

Facts

The petitioner, Commissioner of CGST and Central Excise Jammu, filed an appeal against the respondent, Jay Ambey Aromatics SIDCO Industrial Complex Jammu. The appeal concerns an unspecified tax period and challenges an order or action by an unspecified authority. The amount in dispute is not stated. This appeal is stated to be similar and identical to several other Excise Appeals previously considered and decided by the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh in a judgment dated 23rd May 2022, where CEA No. 10 of 2020 was the leading case. The petitioner's counsel was heard.

Held

The Court held that the present appeal is similar and identical to several other Excise Appeals that were considered and decided by the Court vide its judgment and order dated 23rd May 2022, with CEA No. 10 of 2020 being the leading case. Having heard the counsel for the appellant, the Court was of the opinion that as no new ground is available to the appellant, the matter stands squarely covered by the aforementioned decision. Accordingly, the appeal was dismissed on the same terms and conditions as laid down in the judgment and order dated 23rd May, 2022 passed in CEA No. 10/2020 and connected appeals. The specific ratio decidendi from the prior judgment is not detailed here, but the principle applied is that identical matters, without new grounds, should be decided consistently with previous rulings.

Key Issues

1. Whether the present appeal is squarely covered by the judgment and order dated 23rd May 2022 passed in CEA No. 10/2020 and connected appeals, as argued by the petitioner's counsel. The petitioner argued that the appeal is identical to previous cases decided by the Court and that no new grounds are available to the appellant, implying the appeal should be dismissed on the same terms as the prior judgment. The respondent's arguments are not recorded in the judgment.