Commissioner Of Central GST And Central Excise J And K Jammu vs. M/S Hard Castle Petrofer PVT LTD Sicop Industrial Estate Kathua
Held
The Court dismissed the appeal as barred by limitation. The reasoning was based on a prior decision by a Division Bench of the same High Court in CEA No. 10/2020. In that case, an appeal with similar grounds for condonation of delay was also dismissed as being barred by limitation. The Court found that the facts and circumstances in the present appeal were identical to the precedent case, and therefore, the same outcome was applicable. The principle established is that if a High Court has already ruled on a similar matter concerning the condonation of delay in filing an appeal under the Central Excise Act, subsequent appeals with identical grounds for delay will be dismissed on the same basis, without re-examining the merits of the delay.
Facts
The Commissioner of Central GST and Central Excise (J&K) Jammu filed an appeal under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944, against a final order dated 06.03.2018 passed by CESTAT Chandigarh. The appeal was filed with a delay of 970 days, and an application for condonation of delay was submitted. The appellant's counsel acknowledged that a similar issue concerning delay had arisen in a previous appeal, CEA No. 10/2020, where the grounds for condonation were similar. However, in that prior case, the Division Bench of the High Court had dismissed the appeal as barred by limitation.
Key Issues
1. Whether the delay of 970 days in filing the appeal under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944, should be condoned. Petitioner's Arguments: The petitioner sought condonation of delay, arguing that the delay was attributable to circumstances that prevented timely filing. The petitioner relied on the grounds urged in a previous, similar application for condonation of delay. Revenue's Arguments: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the revenue or state in this matter. However, the Court's decision was based on the precedent set in a similar case.
Sections Cited
Section 35G
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORDER 15.11.2023
The present appeal being CEA No. 147 of 2023 filed by the Commissioner of Central GST & Central Excise (J&K) Jammu filed under Section 35 G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 against the final order dated 06.03.2018 passed by CESTAT Chandigarh, is delayed by 970 days. Hence, a separate application seeking condonation of delay. Learned counsel for the appellant/applicant fairly submits that the similar issue had arisen in an appeal bearing CEA No. 10/2020, wherein also the appellant/applicant had sought condonation of delay on similar grounds as have been urged in this application but the Division Bench of this Court did not accept the application and dismissed the appeal as barred by limitation. In view of the above
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.