Commissioner Of Central GST And Central Excise J And K Jammu vs. M/S Jay Ambe Aromatics Sidco Industrial Complex Bari Brahmana Jammu J And K
Held
The Court held that the appeal was barred by limitation. The reasoning was based on the precedent set by a Division Bench of the same High Court in a similar case, CEA No. 10/2020. In that prior case, the Court had considered an appeal with identical grounds for delay condonation and had dismissed it as being barred by limitation. Applying the same logic and precedent to the present case, the Court found no reason to deviate from its earlier decision. Therefore, the application for condonation of delay was not accepted, and consequently, the appeal itself was dismissed on the grounds of limitation. The operative direction was the dismissal of the appeal and all connected applications.
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 March 6, 2018, passed by CESTAT Chandigarh. The appeal was significantly delayed by 1487 days, and the appellant filed a separate application seeking condonation of this delay. The appellant's counsel acknowledged that a similar issue concerning delay condonation had arisen in a previous appeal, CEA No. 10/2020, where the grounds were identical. 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 1487 days in filing the appeal under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944, is liable to be condoned, considering the grounds urged by the appellant. Contentions: Petitioner/Appellant: The appellant sought condonation of delay, arguing that similar grounds had been presented in a prior appeal (CEA No. 10/2020). Revenue/State: The judgment records no specific arguments made by the revenue/state in opposition to the delay condonation application. However, the court's decision implies that the grounds presented were not found sufficient or persuasive.
Sections Cited
Section 35G
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORDER 24.04.2023
The appeal 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 1487 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, what has said by the Division Bench of this Court in order dated 23.05.2022 p
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.