Commissioner Of Central GST And Central Excise J And K Jammu vs. Emcure Pharmaceuticals LTD Sidco Industrial Complex Bari Brahmana J And K

Held

The Court held that the present appeal was identical to several other Excise Appeals previously decided by the Court in its judgment and order dated May 23, 2022, in CEA No. 10/2020 and connected appeals. The Court found no new grounds available to the appellant (Commissioner of Central GST and Central Excise, J&K Jammu). Consequently, the appeal was dismissed on the same terms and conditions as laid down in the prior judgment. The ratio decidendi is that if an appeal presents no new legal or factual grounds and is identical to previously decided matters, it will be dismissed on the same basis. The operative direction was the dismissal of the appeal.

Facts

The Commissioner of Central GST and Central Excise, J&K Jammu (appellant) filed an appeal against Emcure Pharmaceuticals Ltd. (respondent). The appeal was considered identical to several other Excise Appeals previously decided by the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh vide a judgment and order dated May 23, 2022, where CEA No. 10 of 2020 was the leading case. The appellant's counsel was heard, and the Court found no new grounds for the appellant. The appeal was therefore dismissed on the same terms and conditions as laid down in the prior judgment.

Key Issues

1. Whether the present appeal raises any new grounds not covered by the High Court's previous decision in CEA No. 10/2020 and connected appeals, dated May 23, 2022? Petitioner/Appellant's Argument: The appellant argued that the present appeal should be considered on its merits. However, the judgment indicates that the appellant's counsel was heard and the Court found no new grounds available to the appellant, implying that the appellant did not successfully present any distinct arguments or legal points that differed from the prior case. Respondent's Argument: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the respondent. However, the Court's decision to dismiss the appeal on the same terms as the previous judgment suggests that the respondent's position, or at least the outcome favorable to the respondent in the prior case, was upheld.