Commissioner Of Central GST And Central Excise J And K Jammu vs. Om Metal Sharper Industries Sidco Industrial Complex Bari Brahmana Jammu

Held

The Court held that the present appeal was to be dismissed on the same terms and conditions as laid down in the judgment dated May 23, 2022, passed by the Coordinate Bench. This decision was based on the principle of maintaining parity, as the instant appeal challenged a similar CESTAT order on almost identical grounds that had already been dealt with by the Coordinate Bench. The reasoning was that since a prior batch of similar appeals, based on the same legal precedent (M/s SRD Nutrients Pvt. Ltd. V. Commissioner of Central Excise, Guwahati) and raising similar issues, were dismissed, the present appeal should follow suit to ensure consistency in judicial pronouncements. Any interim directions that were subsisting were also vacated.

Facts

The Commissioner of Central GST and Central Excise, Jammu, filed an appeal against an order passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT). The CESTAT had set aside orders of the Commissioner (Appeals) and the Adjudicating Authority, directing the refund of Education Cess and Secondary & Higher Education Cess to the respondent, OM Metal Sharper Industries. This direction was based on the Supreme Court's decision in M/s SRD Nutrients Pvt. Ltd. V. Commissioner of Central Excise, Guwahati. A batch of similar appeals filed by the Commissioner, including the lead case CEA No. 10/2022, had previously been dismissed by a Coordinate Bench of the High Court on May 23, 2022. The instant appeal was filed against a similar CESTAT order on identical grounds.

Key Issues

1. Whether the present appeal, challenging a CESTAT order directing the refund of Education Cess and Secondary & Higher Education Cess, is to be dismissed on the same grounds and terms as a batch of similar appeals previously dismissed by a Coordinate Bench of this Court on May 23, 2022? (Question of law and fact). Petitioner's contention: The petitioner argued that the present appeal involved a similar CESTAT order and identical grounds as the appeals decided by the Coordinate Bench on May 23, 2022. Therefore, parity should be maintained, and the appeal should be dismissed on the same terms. Respondent's contention: No arguments were recorded for the respondent as they were absent.