Commissioner Of Central GST And Central Excise J And K Jammu vs. M/S Gaurav Agro - Chem Industries Sicop Igc Kathua J And K

Held

The Court held that the present appeal was based on almost identical grounds and challenged a similar order as a batch of appeals previously considered and dismissed by a Coordinate Bench of this Court on May 23, 2022. To maintain parity, the Court dismissed the instant appeal on the same terms and conditions as laid down in the previous judgment. Any interim directions that were subsisting were also vacated. The ratio decidendi is that appeals with identical grounds and challenging similar orders to those previously decided by a Coordinate Bench should be dismissed to ensure consistency and parity in judicial pronouncements. The Court did not expressly leave any issue undecided.

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), Chandigarh. 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 assessee, M/s Gaurav Agro-Chem 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, including the lead case CEA No. 10/2022, had previously been dismissed by a Coordinate Bench of this Court on May 23, 2022. The present appeal was also based on similar grounds and challenged a similar CESTAT order.

Key Issues

1. Whether the present appeal, challenging a CESTAT order directing the refund of Education Cess and Secondary & Higher Education Cess to the assessee, is maintainable in light of a previous judgment by a Coordinate Bench of this Court dismissing similar appeals on identical grounds. Petitioner's Argument: The petitioner, Commissioner of Central GST and Central Excise, Jammu, argued that the appeal should be considered on its merits. However, the judgment indicates that the grounds raised were identical to those dealt with in a previous batch of appeals. Respondent's Argument: The respondent, M/s Gaurav Agro-Chem Industries, did not present any arguments as none were recorded in the judgment. The CESTAT's order, which directed the refund based on the SRD Nutrients case, was the basis for the respondent's position.