Commissioner Of Central GST And Central Excise J And K Jammu vs. Krishi Rasayan Exports Private LTD Igc Samba J And K
Held
The Court held that the application for condonation of delay and the subsequent appeal were barred by limitation. The Court noted that a similar issue had been dealt with in CEA No. 10/2020, where the appellant had sought condonation of delay on similar grounds. In that case, the Division Bench of the High Court had dismissed the appeal as barred by limitation. Applying the same reasoning and precedent from the earlier judgment, the Court found no merit in the current application for condonation of delay. Consequently, the appeal filed by the Commissioner of Central GST and Central Excise (J&K) Jammu was dismissed. The operative direction was the dismissal of the appeal and 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 filed with a delay of 1413 days, for which a separate application for condonation of delay was submitted. The appellant's counsel acknowledged that a similar issue had arisen in a previous appeal, CEA No. 10/2020, where the appellant also sought condonation of delay on similar grounds. In that prior case, a Division Bench of the High Court had dismissed the appeal as barred by limitation. The present appeal concerns the same respondent, Krishi Rasayan Exports Private Ltd.
Key Issues
1. Whether the delay of 1413 days in filing the appeal under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944, is liable to be condoned? Petitioner's Argument: The petitioner, Commissioner of Central GST and Central Excise (J&K) Jammu, sought condonation of delay, arguing that the delay was attributable to reasons that warranted leniency. The petitioner's counsel referred to the grounds urged in the application for condonation. Respondent's Argument: The respondent, Krishi Rasayan Exports Private Ltd., did not present any arguments as recorded in the judgment. However, the Court's decision was influenced by a previous High Court order.
Sections Cited
Section 35G
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORDER 03.04.2023
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 1413 days. Hence, a separate application seeking condonation of delay has been filed. 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 been said by the Division Bench of this Court in order date
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.