Commissioner Central GST And Central Excise Vadodara 1 vs. Bodal Chemicals LTD (Unit Vii)
Held
The Gujarat High Court, following its own previous order in Tax Appeal No. 767 of 2018 and allied appeals, allowed the present Tax Appeals. The Court quashed and set aside the impugned common order passed by the learned Tribunal (CESTAT) dated July 31, 2017. The appeals were restored to the file of the learned Tribunal. To avoid multiplicity of proceedings, the Court directed that the appeals on remand be kept pending until the decision of the High Court in the case of Essar Steel India Ltd. (Tax Appeal No. 444 of 2016), as that decision would have a direct bearing on the pending appeals before the Tribunal. The Revenue/Department was permitted to file an application for an early hearing of Tax Appeal No. 444 of 2016. The appeals were partly allowed to the extent of remanding the matters.
Facts
The Commissioner of Central GST and Central Excise, Vadodara, filed multiple Tax Appeals before the Gujarat High Court challenging a common order passed by the CESTAT. The respondent in these appeals is Inox India Ltd. The appeals were filed challenging the CESTAT's order dated July 31, 2017. The High Court noted that there was a broad consensus between the parties to dispose of these appeals on the same terms as a group of previously decided appeals (Tax Appeal No. 767 of 2018 and allied appeals). Consequently, the matters were to be remanded to the CESTAT for fresh decisions.
Key Issues
1. Whether the impugned common order passed by the learned Tribunal (CESTAT) dated July 31, 2017, is liable to be quashed and set aside? Petitioner's Argument (Revenue/Department): The petitioner relied on the order passed by the Gujarat High Court in Tax Appeal No. 767 of 2018 and allied Tax Appeals, which had quashed and set aside a similar order by the CESTAT and remanded the matters. The petitioner argued that these appeals should be disposed of on the same terms. Respondent's Argument (Inox India Ltd.): The respondent's counsel agreed with the petitioner's submission that the appeals should be disposed of on the same terms as the previously decided group of appeals, implying agreement with the remand to the CESTAT.
Sections Cited
None explicitly mentioned in the operative part of the judgment, but the context implies challenges to orders under the Central Excise Act, 1944, and potentially the Finance Act, 1994, given the reference to CESTAT and the nature of tax appeals.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
C/TAXAP/812/2018 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/TAX APPEAL NO. 812 of 2018 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 813 of 2018 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 831 of 2018 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 832 of 2018 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 833 of 2018 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 835 of 2018 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 837 of 2018 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 838 of 2018 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 839 of 2018 With R/TAX APPEAL NO. 840 of 2018
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH
and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.Y. KOGJE =========================================================== 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? No 2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? No 3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ? No 4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution of India or any order made thereunder ? No 2018:GUJHC:19633-DB
C/TAXAP/812/2018 JUDGM
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.
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 Gujarat High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.