Commissioner Of Central G.S.T. And Central Excise J And K Jammu vs. Hitachi Home And Life Solutions INDIA LTD.
Held
The Court decided to issue notice to the respondent, Hitachi Home and Life Solutions India Ltd., to show cause as to why the appeal should not be admitted for hearing. The Court acknowledged that the issue in the present case is subject to consideration in LPAOW No.123/2011. Furthermore, the Court directed that the impugned judgment dated September 5, 2018, passed by the CESTAT, would be stayed with respect to the remaining amount claimed as refunded by the respondent, subject to the appellant (revenue) releasing 50% of the amount due in terms of the CESTAT judgment. This stay is contingent upon the appellant furnishing a solvent surety to the satisfaction of the Jurisdictional Commissioner within four weeks of furnishing such surety. The Court did not decide on the merits of the appeal at this stage.
Facts
The petitioner, Commissioner of Central GST & Central Excise, filed an appeal against an order dated September 5, 2018, passed by the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) in appeal numbers E/51740/2014 to E/51746/2014. The respondent is Hitachi Home and Life Solutions India Ltd. The CESTAT order appears to have directed the refund of certain amounts to the respondent. The High Court is considering an application to dispense with the certified copy of the impugned order, which was allowed. The appeal itself is being considered in light of a pending matter, LPAOW No.123/2011, and an interim order was previously issued in favor of the revenue. The court is now issuing notice to the respondent.
Key Issues
1. Whether the appeal filed by the revenue is to be admitted for hearing, considering its relation to LPAOW No.123/2011 and a previous interim order in favor of the revenue. Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner, Commissioner of Central GST & Central Excise, seeks admission of the appeal for hearing. They rely on a Supreme Court order dated January 13, 2012, in Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No.28194-28201/2010, which previously led to an interim order in their favor. Respondent's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific arguments from the respondent at this stage, other than the fact that notice is being issued to them to show cause.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
MCC 191/2019
Serial No. 41 Regular List
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AT JAMMU
MCC No. 191/2019 c/w CEA No.148/2019, IA No. 01/2019. Date of order: 15.04.2019
Commissioner of Central GST & Central Excise vs. Hitachi Home and Life Solutions India Ltd. \
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.191/2019:
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.148/2019: 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.
M
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.