Commissioner Central Goods And Service Tax And Central Excise, Vadodara-I vs. M/S Transpek Silox Industry LTD

Held

The Court held that there was a broad consensus between the learned advocates for the respective parties to dispose of the present appeals on the same terms as per the order passed in other group of appeals being Tax Appeal No. 767 of 2018 and allied Tax Appeals. Consequently, all these matters were to be remanded to the learned CESTAT for fresh decision. The Court followed its own speaking order passed in Tax Appeal No. 767 of 2018 and allied Tax Appeals dated July 9, 2018. The impugned common order passed by the learned CESTAT dated July 31, 2017, was quashed and set aside. The appeals were restored to the file of the learned Tribunal. To avoid multiplicity of proceedings, the appeals on remand were directed to be kept pending till the decision of the Court in the case of Essar Steel India Ltd. (Tax Appeal No. 444 of 2016). The Revenue/Department was permitted to file an application for fixing an early date of hearing for Tax Appeal No. 444 of 2016, as its decision would have a direct bearing on the pending appeals before the CESTAT.

Facts

These are multiple Tax Appeals filed by the Commissioner Central GST and Central Excise, Vadodara, against M/s. Inox India Ltd. The appeals challenge a common order passed by the learned CESTAT dated July 31, 2017. The petitioner and respondent parties have reached a consensus to dispose of these appeals on similar terms as a group of other appeals (Tax Appeal No. 767 of 2018 and allied appeals) previously decided by this Court. The procedural history indicates that the matters were remanded to the CESTAT for fresh consideration. The specific tax periods and amounts in dispute are not explicitly detailed in this judgment, but it refers to the impugned common order of the CESTAT.

Key Issues

1. Whether the impugned common order passed by the learned CESTAT dated July 31, 2017, is liable to be quashed and set aside? Petitioner's contention: The petitioner, Commissioner Central GST and Central Excise, argued that the matters should be disposed of on the same terms as decided in Tax Appeal No. 767 of 2018 and allied appeals. They agreed with the consensus to remand the matters to the learned CESTAT for a fresh decision. Respondent's contention: The respondent, Inox India Ltd., through its counsel, also agreed to the consensus for disposing of the appeals on the same terms as the previously decided group of appeals, which involved remanding the matters to the CESTAT. No specific arguments were recorded for the respondent beyond this agreement.