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

Held

The Court held that the present appeal is similar and identical to several other Excise Appeals that were considered and decided by the Court vide its judgment and order dated 23rd May 2022, with CEA No. 10 of 2020 being the leading case. Having heard the counsel for the appellant, the Court was of the opinion that as no new ground was available to the appellant, the matter stands squarely covered by the aforementioned decision. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed on the same terms and conditions as laid down in the judgment and order dated 23rd May 2022 passed in CEA No. 10/2020 and connected appeals. The ratio decidendi is that appeals with identical facts and no new grounds are bound by previous High Court judgments on similar matters. No specific operative directions were issued beyond the dismissal of the appeal.

Facts

This is an appeal filed by the Commissioner of Central GST and Central Excise, J&K, Jammu (the appellant/revenue) against Zuventus Healthcare Ltd. (the respondent). The appeal concerns issues identical to several other Excise Appeals previously decided by the High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh. The judgment refers to a decision dated 23rd May 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 specific tax period and amount in dispute are not recorded in this judgment. The procedural history is limited to the filing of this appeal and its similarity to prior cases.

Key Issues

1. Whether the present appeal raises any new grounds not covered by the previous judgment of this Court dated 23rd May 2022 in CEA No. 10/2020 and connected appeals? (Question of law) The appellant argued that the matter should be considered on its merits. However, the Court noted that the appellant's counsel was heard and that no new grounds were available to the appellant. The respondent did not present any arguments as recorded in this judgment. The appellant relied on the fact that this was an appeal before the High Court. The core issue revolves around whether the current appeal is distinguishable from the prior judgment.