Facts of the Case

The Commissioner of Central GST and Central Excise, Jammu and Kashmir, Jammu filed an appeal before the High Court under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 against an order passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh (“CESTAT”).

The dispute formed part of a broader group of similar matters in which CESTAT had set aside 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 refund direction was recorded as having been made in view of the decision of the Supreme Court in M/s SRD Nutrients Pvt. Ltd. vs Commissioner of Central Excise, Guwahati, reported as 2017 (335) ELT 481 (SC).

The High Court noted that a batch of similar appeals filed by the Commissioner, along 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.

Issues Involved

The principal issues arising from the judgment were:

  1. 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 could be entertained when substantially similar appeals had already been dismissed by a Coordinate Bench.
  2. Whether the present appeal raised grounds materially distinguishable from those considered in the earlier batch of appeals decided on 23 May 2022.
  3. Whether judicial parity and consistency required the present appeal to be dismissed on the same terms and conditions as the earlier batch judgment.
  4. Whether any subsisting interim directions should continue after dismissal of the appeal.

Appellant’s Arguments

The appellant, Commissioner of Central GST and Central Excise J&K, Jammu, challenged the CESTAT order under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944.

From the judgment, the Revenue’s challenge concerned the CESTAT decision which 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.

The High Court, however, specifically observed that the challenge in the present appeal was directed against a similar order and 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 accuracy note: The short two-page judgment does not separately reproduce a detailed, ground-by-ground statement of the appellant’s submissions. Therefore, no additional arguments beyond those reflected in the judgment have been attributed to the Revenue.

Respondent’s Arguments

The respondent, M/s Cadila Pharmaceuticals Ltd., IGC Samba J&K, was represented by Senior Counsel along with Advocate.

The respondent stood as beneficiary of the CESTAT order concerning refund of Education Cess and Secondary & Higher Education Cess.

The judgment indicates that the controversy was materially similar to the earlier batch of appeals already decided by the Coordinate Bench. The decisive consideration recorded by the Court was that the grounds in the present appeal were almost identical to those already dealt with in the judgment dated 23 May 2022.

Important accuracy note: The judgment does not separately set out detailed oral or written submissions advanced by the respondent. Accordingly, no arguments have been invented or added beyond the contents of the judicial order.

Court Order / Findings

The High Court examined the contents of the present appeal and recorded the following material findings:

  • The order challenged in the present appeal was similar to the orders involved in the earlier batch of appeals.
  • The grounds raised were almost identical to those already considered and dealt with by the Coordinate Bench.
  • The Coordinate Bench had already passed judgment dated 23 May 2022 in the earlier batch.
  • In order to maintain parity, the High Court dismissed the present appeal.
  • The dismissal was ordered on the same terms and conditions as laid down in the Coordinate Bench judgment dated 23 May 2022.
  • Any interim directions subsisting as on the date of judgment were ordered to stand vacated.

The operative conclusion on page 2 is explicit that, because the present challenge concerned a similar order on almost identical grounds already dealt with by the Coordinate Bench, the Court dismissed the appeal to maintain parity and vacated subsisting interim directions.

Important Clarification

This judgment is significant primarily as an application of judicial parity and consistency. The High Court did not undertake a fresh, elaborate merits analysis of the Education Cess refund controversy in this short order. Instead, it found that the present appeal involved a similar challenged order and almost identical grounds that had already been dealt with by a Coordinate Bench.

Accordingly, the appeal was dismissed on the same terms and conditions as the earlier judgment dated 23 May 2022. Therefore, the order should not be presented as containing an independent and exhaustive reconsideration of every substantive question concerning refund of Education Cess and Secondary & Higher Education Cess.

A further important clarification is that the judgment refers to M/s SRD Nutrients Pvt. Ltd. vs Commissioner of Central Excise, Guwahati, 2017 (335) ELT 481 (SC) in explaining the basis on which CESTAT had directed refunds in the relevant group of matters. The precise ratio of the present two-page judgment is its reliance on the earlier Coordinate Bench disposition and the need to maintain parity.

Sections / Legal Provisions Involved

Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 — The appeal was filed before the High Court under this provision against the order of CESTAT.

Education Cess and Secondary & Higher Education Cess refund framework — The substantive dispute concerned refund of these cesses as reflected in the CESTAT orders challenged by the Revenue.

Judicial parity / consistency with Coordinate Bench decision — Although not a statutory section, this was the decisive judicial basis expressly applied by the High Court while dismissing the appeal.

Link to Download the Order-https://mytaxexpert.co.in/uploads/1783402218_1337compressed.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.