Comissioner Of Central GST And Central Excise J And K Jammu vs. M/S Berger Paints INDIA PVT LTD Sidco Igc Samba J And K

Held

The Court held that the appeal was barred by limitation. The explanation offered by the appellant for the delay of 1720 days, which was based on the Supreme Court's decision in M/s Unicorn Industries Vs. U.O.I. and Ors (2020) 3 SCC 492, was not accepted. The Court noted that a similar explanation had been previously rejected by a Division Bench of the same Court in CEA No. 10/2020, which was dismissed for being barred by limitation. The appellant's counsel acknowledged that the present case was identical to CEA No. 10/2020 and that no additional grounds were presented for condoning the substantial delay. Consequently, the Court applied the reasoning from the previous order and dismissed the present appeal on the 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 before the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh against an order dated 09.03.2018 passed by CESTAT, Chandigarh. The appeal was filed with a delay of 1720 days. The appellant explained this delay by stating that the decision to file the appeal was taken only after the Supreme Court's decision in M/s Unicorn Industries Vs. U.O.I. and Ors (2020) 3 SCC 492, which they believed settled the law. However, the Court noted that a similar explanation had been rejected by the same Court in a previous case, CEA No. 10/2020, which was dismissed due to limitation. The appellant's counsel conceded that the present case was identical to the one in CEA No. 10/2020, with no new grounds presented for the condonation of the significant delay.

Key Issues

1. Whether the delay of 1720 days in filing the appeal can be condoned, considering the explanation provided by the appellant regarding the Supreme Court's decision in M/s Unicorn Industries Vs. U.O.I. and Ors (2020) 3 SCC 492. This issue turns on the interpretation and application of principles governing condonation of delay, particularly in light of previous judicial pronouncements by the same Court. Contentions: Petitioner (Commissioner of Central GST and Central Excise): Argued that the delay should be condoned as the decision to appeal was taken after the law was settled by the Supreme Court in M/s Unicorn Industries Vs. U.O.I. and Ors (2020) 3 SCC 492. Respondent (M/s Berger Paints India Pvt. Ltd.): Did not record any specific arguments in the judgment regarding the condonation of delay.