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

Facts

The Commissioner of CGST and Central Excise, Jammu, filed an appeal (CEA No. 268/2022) against an order concerning Jay Ambey Aromatics. The appeal was heard by the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh at Jammu. The appellant's counsel was present, while the respondent was represented. The Court noted that this appeal was identical to several other Excise Appeals previously decided by the Court on May 23, 2022, with CEA No. 10 of 2020 being the leading case. The Court observed that no new grounds were presented by the appellant.

Held

The Court held that the present appeal was identical to several other Excise Appeals previously considered and decided by the Court on May 23, 2022, with CEA No. 10 of 2020 as the leading case. Since no new grounds were presented by the appellant, the matter was considered squarely covered by the prior decision. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed on the same terms and conditions as laid down in the judgment and order dated May 23, 2022, in CEA No. 10/2020 and connected appeals. The ratio decidendi is that appeals raising identical issues without new grounds are bound by previous High Court judgments on similar matters.

Key Issues

1. Whether the present appeal is squarely covered by the previous judgment of this Court dated May 23, 2022, in CEA No. 10/2020 and connected appeals, given that no new grounds have been raised by the appellant? Petitioner/Appellant's Contention: The appellant argued that the appeal was identical to previously decided matters and no new grounds were available. Revenue/State's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific arguments from the respondent's side. However, the Court's decision implies an acceptance of the appellant's position that the matter is covered by precedent.