Commissioner Of Central G.S.T. And Central Excise J And K Jammu vs. V M C O Alloys
Held
The Court decided to issue notice to the respondent in CEA No.142/2019, directing them to show cause as to why the appeal should not be admitted to hearing. The appeal was listed for May 13, 2019, along with connected matters. In the interim, the Court directed that the recovery of the remaining amount claimed as refunded by the respondent shall be stayed, subject to the appellant releasing 50% of the amount due in terms of the CESTAT's impugned judgment dated August 29, 2018. This stay is conditional upon the appellant furnishing a solvent surety to the satisfaction of the Jurisdictional Commissioner within four weeks of furnishing such surety. The Court also allowed MCC No. 185/2019, dispensing with the provision of a certified copy of the impugned order.
Facts
The petitioner, Commissioner of Central GST & Central Excise, filed an appeal (CEA No.142/2019) against an order dated August 29, 2018, passed by the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) in appeal numbers E/55712/2014 to E/55722/2014. The respondent is V M C O Alloys. The issue raised in the present case is stated to be the subject matter of consideration in LPAOW No.123/2011. An interim order was previously issued in favour of the revenue in this appeal, relying on a Supreme Court order dated January 13, 2012. The High Court also dealt with MCC No. 185/2019, allowing an application to dispense with the certified copy of an impugned order.
Key Issues
1. Whether the appeal (CEA No.142/2019) should be admitted to hearing, considering its relation to LPAOW No.123/2011 and a previous interim order in favour of the revenue based on a Supreme Court decision. Petitioner's Argument: The petitioner relies on the Supreme Court's order dated January 13, 2012, in Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No.28194-28201/2010, which led to an interim order in their favour. They contend that the issue is similar to that being considered in LPAOW No.123/2011. Respondent's Argument: No specific argument is recorded for the respondent in the provided text.
Sections Cited
None explicitly mentioned as being discussed or interpreted, only reference to appeal numbers and a Supreme Court order.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Serial No. 35 Regular List
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AT JAMMU
MCC No. 185/2019 c/w CEA No.142/2019, IA No. 01/2019. Date of order: 15.04.2019
Commissioner of Central GST & Central Excise vs. V M C O Alloys. \
Coram: HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE SINDHU SHARMA, JUDGE
Appearance: For the petitioner/appellant(s) : Mr. Jagpaul Singh Advocate. For the Respondent(s)
: i) Whether approved for reporting in Yes/No Law journals etc.: ii) Whether approved for publication in press:
Yes/No MCC No.185/2019:
For the reasons stated in the application which is supported by an affidavit, the same is allowed. Accordingly, providing of the certified copy of the impugned order is dispensed with. CEA No.142/2019: It is submitted that the issue raised in the present case is subject matter of consideration in LPAOW No.123/2011. In this appeal placing reliance on order dated 13th January, 2012 passed by the Supreme Court in Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No.28194-28201/2010, interim order was issued in favour of revenue.
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 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.