Commissioner Of Central GST And Central Excise Jammu vs. M/S J And K Cement Corporation Kathua

Held

The Court held that all the Excise Appeals filed by the Commissioner of Central GST and Central Excise, J&K Jammu, were squarely covered by the Court's previous judgment dated May 23, 2022, passed in CEA No. 10 of 2020 and connected appeals. The Court found that no new grounds were available to the appellant to distinguish the present appeals from the earlier decided matters. Consequently, the Court dismissed all the appeals on the same terms and conditions as laid down in the aforementioned prior judgment. The ratio decidendi is that if an appeal raises no new grounds and is identical to previously decided matters, it will be dismissed on the same basis. No specific operative directions beyond dismissal were mentioned, and no issues were left undecided.

Facts

The Commissioner of Central GST and Central Excise, J&K Jammu (Appellant/Petitioner) filed numerous Excise Appeals before the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh. These appeals were against Kashmir Steel Rolling Mills (Respondent). The appeals were identical to several other Excise Appeals previously considered and decided by the Court. The Court noted that no new grounds were available to the appellant, and the matter was squarely covered by a prior decision dated May 23, 2022, in CEA No. 10 of 2020 and connected appeals. The specific tax periods, amounts in dispute, or the exact nature of the orders or actions under challenge are not detailed in this judgment, but it is clear the appeals concerned excise matters.

Key Issues

1. Whether the present Excise Appeals are covered by the Court's previous judgment dated May 23, 2022, in CEA No. 10 of 2020 and connected appeals, given that no new grounds are available to the appellant. Arguments: Petitioner/Appellant: The appellant contended that the present appeals raise issues identical to those decided in the prior judgment and that no novel arguments or facts have been presented. Therefore, the appeals should be decided in line with the previous ruling. Respondent/Revenue: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the respondent. However, the Court's decision implies that the respondent's position, or at least the lack of new grounds from the appellant, led to the dismissal of the appeals based on the prior ruling.