Facts of the Case
The Commissioner of CGST and Central Excise, Jammu filed the
present appeal under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 against
an order of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh.
The dispute formed part of a broader batch of appeals filed by
the Commissioner, Central GST and Central Excise (Jammu and Kashmir), Jammu
against orders passed on different dates by CESTAT. In those matters, CESTAT
had set aside the orders passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) and the
Adjudicating Authority and had directed refund of Education Cess and Secondary
& Higher Education Cess to the assessees.
The Tribunal’s approach was based on the decision of the
Supreme Court in M/s SRD Nutrients Pvt. Ltd. vs Commissioner of Central
Excise, Guwahati, 2017 (335) ELT 481 (SC).
The High Court recorded that the earlier batch of appeals,
together with applications seeking condonation of delay, had already been
dismissed by a Coordinate Bench through judgment dated 23 May 2022, with
CEA No. 10/2022 being the lead case. The present appeal challenged a
similar order on almost identical grounds.
Issues Involved
The principal issues arising from the order were:
- Whether
the Revenue’s appeal under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944
against the CESTAT order directing refund of Education Cess and Secondary
& Higher Education Cess was maintainable or required separate
consideration when substantially identical appeals had already been
dismissed by a Coordinate Bench.
- Whether
the present appeal raised any materially distinct ground warranting a
departure from the judgment dated 23 May 2022 passed in the earlier batch
of appeals.
- Whether,
in view of the almost identical grounds and similar nature of the
challenged CESTAT order, the principle of parity required dismissal of the
present appeal on the same terms and conditions as the earlier batch.
Appellant’s / Revenue’s Arguments
The appellant, Commissioner of CGST and Central Excise
Jammu, challenged the CESTAT order under Section 35G of the Central
Excise Act, 1944.
From the Court’s recorded order, the Revenue’s challenge
concerned a CESTAT decision similar to those involved in the earlier batch of
appeals. The challenged Tribunal orders had set aside the orders of the
Commissioner (Appeals) and the Adjudicating Authority and had directed refund
of Education Cess and Secondary & Higher Education Cess to the assessee.
The High Court specifically observed that the present
challenge was founded on almost identical grounds to those already
considered and dealt with by the Coordinate Bench in its judgment dated 23 May
2022.
Important note: The short order does not
separately reproduce detailed proposition-wise submissions advanced on behalf
of the appellant. Therefore, no additional argument should be attributed to the
Revenue beyond what is expressly reflected in the judgment.
Respondent’s Arguments
The judgment records “None” under the appearance for
the respondent.
Accordingly, the order does not set out any separate oral or
written submissions made on behalf of Sun Pharmaceutical in the present
proceedings. No independent respondent argument should therefore be inferred or
added beyond the contents of the judicial order.
Court Order / Findings
The High Court examined the contents of the present appeal and
found that:
- the
appeal challenged an order similar to those forming the subject matter of
the earlier batch of appeals;
- the
grounds raised were almost identical to the grounds already
considered by the Coordinate Bench;
- those
grounds had already been dealt with in the judgment dated 23 May 2022;
and
- parity
in judicial treatment was therefore required.
The High Court consequently dismissed the appeal on the
same terms and conditions as laid down in the Coordinate Bench judgment
dated 23 May 2022.
The Court further ordered that any interim direction(s)
subsisting as on the date of the order would stand vacated.
Important Clarification
This order is significant because the High Court did not
undertake a fresh detailed adjudication of the cess-refund controversy on
merits in the present appeal. Instead, the Court found that the challenged
order and grounds were substantially similar to those already considered in the
earlier batch and dismissed the present appeal to maintain parity with
the Coordinate Bench judgment dated 23 May 2022.
Therefore, the precise ratio of the present order should be
understood carefully: where the Revenue’s appeal challenged a similar CESTAT
order on almost identical grounds already dealt with by the Coordinate Bench,
the High Court followed the earlier judgment and dismissed the appeal on the
same terms and conditions.
It is also important that the present two-page order refers to
the earlier batch judgment but does not reproduce the complete reasoning of
that judgment. Accordingly, the broader legal reasoning of the 23 May 2022
decision should not be assumed beyond what is expressly recorded in this order.
Sections Involved
Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 – The
provision expressly referred to in the judgment under which the Commissioner
filed appeals before the High Court against the relevant CESTAT orders.
Subject Matter: Refund of Education Cess and Secondary & Higher Education Cess.
Link to download the order -https://mytaxexpert.co.in/uploads/1783160906_888compressed.pdf
Disclaimer
This content is shared strictly for general information and knowledge purposes only. Readers should independently verify the information from reliable sources. It is not intended to provide legal, professional, or advisory guidance. The author and the organisation disclaim all liability arising from the use of this content. The material has been prepared with the assistance of AI tools.
0 Comments
Leave a Comment