Commissioner Of Central GST And Central Excise J And K Jammu vs. M/S Cadila Pharmaceuticals LTD Igc Samba J And K

Held

The Court dismissed the appeal (CEA No. 129 of 2023) as being barred by limitation. The reasoning was that a similar issue concerning condonation of delay on similar grounds had been decided by a Division Bench of the same Court in a previous case (CEA No. 10/2020). In that prior case, the Court had not accepted the application for condonation of delay and had dismissed the appeal. Therefore, the present appeal, being on all fours with the previous one, was also dismissed on the same grounds of limitation. The operative direction was the dismissal of the appeal.

Facts

The Commissioner of Central GST and Central Excise (J&K) Jammu filed an appeal (CEA No. 129 of 2023) against an order dated 06.03.2018 passed by CESTAT Chandigarh. The appeal was filed with a delay of 1292 days, and an application for condonation of delay was submitted. The appellant's counsel acknowledged that a similar issue had been addressed in a previous appeal (CEA No. 10/2020), where the appellant also sought condonation of delay on similar grounds. In that prior case, the Division Bench of the High Court had dismissed the appeal as barred by limitation. The present appeal concerns the same grounds and delay period.

Key Issues

1. Whether the delay of 1292 days in filing the appeal should be condoned, considering the grounds presented by the appellant. Petitioner's Argument: The petitioner sought condonation of delay, arguing that similar issues had arisen in previous matters and that the delay was attributable to administrative reasons. Revenue's Argument: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the revenue or state. However, the Court's decision implies that the revenue's application for condonation of delay was not accepted.