Facts of the Case

The Commissioner of Central GST and Central Excise (Jammu and Kashmir), Jammu filed an appeal under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1994 against an order of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh.

The dispute formed part of a broader batch of appeals concerning CESTAT orders whereby the Tribunal 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 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 recorded that the earlier batch of appeals, together with applications seeking condonation of delay and with CEA No. 10/2022 as the lead case, had already been dismissed by a Coordinate Bench through judgment dated 23 May 2022.

In the present matter, the Court examined the appeal and found that the order under challenge was similar to the orders involved in the earlier batch and that the grounds raised were almost identical to those already considered and dealt with by the Coordinate Bench.

Issues Involved

The principal issues arising from the judgment were:

  1. Whether the appeal filed by the Commissioner under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1994 against the CESTAT order concerning refund of Education Cess and Secondary & Higher Education Cess required separate adjudication when an earlier batch of appeals involving similar orders and almost identical grounds had already been dismissed.
  2. Whether the High Court should maintain parity with the Coordinate Bench judgment dated 23 May 2022.
  3. Whether the CESTAT order directing refund of Education Cess and Secondary & Higher Education Cess, in the context of the decision in M/s SRD Nutrients Pvt. Ltd. vs Commissioner of Central Excise, Guwahati, warranted interference in the present appeal.

Appellant’s Arguments

The appellant, the Commissioner of Central GST and Central Excise J&K, Jammu, challenged the CESTAT order under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1994.

From the judgment, the challenge concerned a similar order to those involved in the earlier batch of appeals, where CESTAT had set aside the orders of the Commissioner (Appeals) and the Adjudicating Authority and directed refund of Education Cess and Secondary & Higher Education Cess to the assessee in view of the Supreme Court decision in SRD Nutrients Pvt. Ltd.

The High Court specifically noted that the grounds raised in the instant appeal were almost identical to the grounds already dealt with by the Coordinate Bench in its judgment dated 23 May 2022.

Respondent’s Arguments

The respondent, M/s Gaurav Agro-Chem Industries, was shown as unrepresented, with the judgment recording “None” under appearance for the respondent.

Accordingly, the judgment does not record any separate oral or written arguments advanced on behalf of the respondent. The matter was decided by the High Court after considering the contents of the appeal and the effect of the earlier Coordinate Bench judgment governing similar challenges.

Court Order / Findings

The High Court made the following findings:

  • A batch of appeals had previously been filed by the Commissioner of Central GST and Central Excise, Jammu under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1994 against different CESTAT orders concerning refund of Education Cess and Secondary & Higher Education Cess.
  • Those appeals, along with applications seeking condonation of delay, had already been dismissed by a Coordinate Bench through judgment dated 23 May 2022.
  • The present appeal challenged a similar order.
  • The grounds raised in the present appeal were almost identical to those already considered and dealt with by the Coordinate Bench.
  • Therefore, with a view to maintain parity, the High Court dismissed the present appeal on the same terms and conditions as laid down in the Coordinate Bench judgment dated 23 May 2022.
  • Any subsisting interim directions were ordered to stand vacated.

Important Clarification

The judgment should be understood with precision. The High Court’s operative reasoning in this particular appeal was based on the fact that:

  • the challenged order was similar to those involved in the earlier batch of appeals;
  • the grounds were almost identical;
  • those grounds had already been dealt with by a Coordinate Bench; and
  • parity was required to be maintained.

Accordingly, the Court dismissed the appeal on the same terms and conditions as the judgment dated 23 May 2022. The present two-page judgment does not independently reproduce a detailed fresh examination of every substantive legal proposition concerning refund of Education Cess and Secondary & Higher Education Cess. It refers to the earlier Coordinate Bench decision and the SRD Nutrients Pvt. Ltd. case in the factual and decisional background. This distinction is important for accurate reporting of the ruling.

Sections / Legal Provisions Involved

Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1994 — The statutory provision under which the Commissioner filed the appeal before the High Court against the CESTAT order.

Education Cess and Secondary & Higher Education Cess — The refund dispute forming the subject matter of the CESTAT orders referred to in the judgment.

Judicial Precedent / Parity Principle — The High Court maintained parity with the earlier Coordinate Bench judgment dated 23 May 2022 because the challenged order was similar and the grounds were almost identical.

 Link to Download the Order-https://mytaxexpert.co.in/uploads/1783402875_1341compressed.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.