Facts of the Case

The Commissioner of Central GST & Central Excise, Jammu filed Central Excise Appeal No. 224/2022, along with CM Nos. 4647/2022 and 4648/2022, against M/s Casil Industries Ltd. before the High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh at Jammu.

The Division Bench comprising Hon’ble Mr. Justice Tashi Rabstan and Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Sekhri considered the appeal on 11 November 2022.

The High Court observed that the present appeal was similar and identical to several other Excise Appeals that had already been considered and decided by the Court through its judgment and order dated 23 May 2022, wherein CEA No. 10/2020 was treated as the leading case.

The Court further noted that no new ground was available to the Appellant and, therefore, the matter stood squarely covered by the earlier decision.

Issues Involved

  1. Whether the present Central Excise Appeal raised any new or distinguishable ground requiring separate adjudication by the High Court.
  2. Whether the appeal was similar and identical to the batch of Excise Appeals already decided by the High Court on 23 May 2022.
  3. Whether the matter stood squarely covered by the earlier judgment and order passed in CEA No. 10/2020 and connected appeals.
  4. Whether, in the absence of any new ground, the present appeal could survive independently of the earlier binding decision governing identical matters.

Petitioner’s Arguments

The Appellant, Commissioner of Central GST & Central Excise, Jammu, was represented by learned counsel Mr. Jagpaul Singh.

The order records that the Court heard counsel for the Appellant. However, it does not reproduce any detailed factual or statutory submissions advanced on behalf of the Appellant.

After hearing the Appellant’s counsel, the High Court formed the opinion that no new ground was available to distinguish the present matter from the earlier decision dated 23 May 2022 in CEA No. 10/2020 and connected appeals.

Accordingly, no separate or novel ground was found sufficient to warrant independent adjudication of the appeal.

Respondent’s Arguments

The order does not record any detailed arguments or submissions on behalf of M/s Casil Industries Ltd.

Therefore, no specific contention should be attributed to the Respondent beyond what is expressly reflected in the judicial order.

The material position emerging from the Court’s determination was that the appeal involved a matter already covered by the earlier decision in CEA No. 10/2020 and connected appeals.

Court Order / Findings

The High Court held that the present appeal was similar and identical to several other Excise Appeals previously considered and decided by the Court through the judgment and order dated 23 May 2022.

The Court specifically identified CEA No. 10/2020 as the leading case in the earlier batch of appeals.

After hearing counsel for the Appellant, the Division Bench concluded that no new ground was available to the Appellant.

Consequently, the Court held that the matter stood squarely covered by the earlier decision.

Accordingly, CEA No. 224/2022 was dismissed on the same terms and conditions as laid down in the judgment and order dated 23 May 2022 passed in CEA No. 10/2020 and connected appeals.

Important Clarification

This order is significant for the application of an earlier decision to subsequent appeals involving similar and identical issues.

The decisive consideration was not an independent re-examination of the underlying excise controversy in the short order dated 11 November 2022. Rather, the High Court found that:

  • the present appeal was similar and identical to previously decided Excise Appeals;
  • CEA No. 10/2020 was the leading case in the earlier batch;
  • the earlier judgment and order had been passed on 23 May 2022;
  • no new ground was available to the Appellant; and
  • the matter was squarely covered by the earlier decision.

Therefore, the present appeal was dismissed on the same terms and conditions as the earlier leading judgment and connected appeals.

It is also important to clarify that the short order does not independently reproduce the detailed factual background, substantive excise controversy, questions of law, or complete reasoning contained in the leading judgment dated 23 May 2022. Any detailed statement regarding those underlying matters should be verified directly from CEA No. 10/2020 and the connected appeals.

Section Involved

Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 — relating to appeals to the High Court in Central Excise matters.

Link to Download the Order  https://mytaxexpert.co.in/uploads/1783317641_1052compressed.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.