Commissioner Of Central GST And Central Excise , J And K vs. Biostadt INDIA Limited

CEA/81/2018HC Jammu and Kashmir and LadakhGSTCNR JKHC02010156201821 August 2019Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL,HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SINDHU SHARMA1 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

Held

The Court decided to dispose of the present appeal in terms of the detailed order passed in CEA No. 05/2018, titled 'Commissioner of Central GST and Central Excise, Jammu v. Sun Pharma Laboratories Limited'. This implies that the findings and directions in the Sun Pharma case would govern the outcome of this appeal. Without the detailed order in CEA No. 05/2018, the specific findings, reasoning, and ratio decidendi for this case cannot be ascertained. The operative directions would be those laid down in the referenced order. No issues were expressly left undecided in this order, as it deferred to the other judgment.

Facts

This is an appeal filed by the Commissioner of Central GST & Central Excise (J&K), Jammu, against Biostadt India Limited. The appeal was disposed of by the High Court of Jammu and Kashmir at Jammu in terms of a detailed order passed in a connected case, CEA No. 05/2018 titled 'Commissioner of Central GST and Central Excise, Jammu v. Sun Pharma Laboratories Limited'. No specific facts pertaining to Biostadt India Limited's case or the tax period in dispute are recorded in this order. The procedural history is limited to the filing of the present appeal.

Key Issues

The judgment does not explicitly frame the issues for determination in this specific appeal. However, it indicates that the present appeal is disposed of in terms of the order passed in CEA No. 05/2018. Therefore, the issues decided in that connected case would implicitly apply. Based on the context of a GST appeal involving a Commissioner as appellant, the likely issues would revolve around the interpretation and application of GST laws, potentially concerning taxability, classification, procedural compliance, or demands raised by the revenue. The petitioner (Commissioner) would likely argue for upholding the revenue's position, while the respondent (assessee) would argue for relief. The specific arguments and provisions relied upon are not detailed in this order, as it refers to a separate, detailed judgment.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AT JAMMU CEA No. 81/2018 IA No.01/2018 Decided on: 21.08.2019 Commissioner of Central GST & Central Excise (J&K), Jammu …Appellant(s) Through:- Mr. Jagpaul Singh, Advocate. v/s Biostadt India Limited … Respondent(s) Through:- None. HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL, JUDGE HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE SINDHU SHARMA, JUDGE

ORDER

RAJESH BINDAL, J

The present appeal is disposed of in terms of the detailed order passed today in CEA No.05/2018 titled as ‘Commissioner of Central GST and Central Excise, Jammu v. Sun Pharma Laboratories Limited’.

(Sindhu Sharma) (Rajesh Bindal)

Judge Judge Jammu 21.08.2019 Raj Kumar

Whether the order is speaking : Yes/No.

Whether the order is reportable : Yes/No.

Coram :

The judgment continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

Reproduced from the public record of the High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.