Facts of the Case
- The
Appellant, the Commissioner of Central GST and Central Excise (Jammu and
Kashmir), Jammu, preferred an appeal under Section 35G of the Central
Excise Act, 1944 against the respondent, M/S Emcure Pharmaceuticals Ltd.
- The
appeal was directed against an order passed by the Customs, Excise and
Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Chandigarh.
- The
CESTAT had previously set aside the orders of the Commissioner (Appeals)
and the Adjudicating Authority, thereby directing the revenue department
to issue a refund of the Education Cess and Secondary & Higher
Education Cess (SHEC) to the assessee.
- The
CESTAT's direction for refunding the cesses was based on the landmark
decision rendered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of M/s
SRD Nutrients Pvt. Ltd. V. Commissioner of Central Excise, Guwahati,
reported as 2017 (335) ELT 481 (SC).
- Along
with the main appeal (CEA No. 336/2022), the revenue department filed
applications seeking condonation of delay (CM Nos. 6710/2022 and
6711/2022).
Issues Involved
- Whether
the appeal filed by the Revenue challenging the CESTAT order directing the
refund of Education Cess and Secondary & Higher Education Cess can be
entertained, given that an identical batch of appeals had already been
adjudicated upon by a Coordinate Bench of the same High Court.
- Whether
the principles of parity and judicial discipline require the dismissal of
the current revenue appeal in identical terms to the lead judgment
delivered by the Coordinate Bench on May 23, 2022.
Petitioner’s (Appellant's) Arguments
- The
Revenue, represented by learned counsel Mr. Jagpaul Singh, argued against
the CESTAT Chandigarh's directives that allowed the refund of the
Education Cess and Secondary & Higher Education Cess to the
respondent-assessee.
- The
appellant threw a challenge against the CESTAT's order on grounds
challenging the absolute applicability or continuity of the refund
mechanism derived from the M/s SRD Nutrients Pvt. Ltd. Supreme
Court ruling.
- The
department filed applications for condonation of delay to allow the
substantive matter to be heard on merits under Section 35G of the Act.
Respondent’s Arguments
- No
representation appeared on behalf of the respondent (M/S Emcure
Pharmaceuticals Ltd.) at the time of the oral order.
- However,
the underlying stance sustained by the respondent via the lower appellate
records relied upon the binding decision of the Apex Court in M/s SRD
Nutrients Pvt. Ltd., which mandated the refund of Education Cess and
SHEC where the primary excise duty was exempted.
Court Order / Findings
- The
Division Bench, comprising Hon'ble the Chief Justice Ali Mohammad Magrey
and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Vinod Chatterji Koul, perused the contents of the
instant appeal.
- The
Bench observed that a substantial batch of similar appeals filed by the
Commissioner of Central GST and Central Excise, Jammu, involving identical
subject matters and grounds, had already been dismissed by a Coordinate
Bench of the High Court via a lead judgment dated May 23, 2022 (in CEA
No. 10/2022).
- The
Court noted that the challenges raised by the Revenue in the current
appeal were on almost identical grounds to those already extensively dealt
with and resolved by the Coordinate Bench in the prior judgment.
- Invoking
the doctrine of judicial discipline and the necessity to maintain judicial
parity, the High Court held that the present appeal deserved the same
treatment.
- Consequently,
the High Court dismissed the Revenue's appeal on the same terms and
conditions as laid down in the Judgment dated May 23, 2022. All subsisting
interim directions were formally vacated.
Important Clarification
- Judicial
Consistency: This judgment reiterates the strict stance
of High Courts regarding judicial consistency. When a Coordinate Bench has
already decided a question of law or a batch of appeals arising from
identical facts (such as the refund of Education Cess based on SRD Nutrients),
subsequent benches will maintain parity and dismiss identical revenue
appeals on the same terms rather than re-litigating the settled position.
Section Involved
- Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (Appeals to the High Court).
Link to download the order -https://mytaxexpert.co.in/uploads/1783313427_908compressed.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