Facts of the Case

This is a short order of the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh at Jammu dismissing an appeal filed under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 — a pre-GST central excise law matter, not a GST dispute, even though the appellant department is now styled "Commissioner of Central GST and Central Excise." The appeal, CEA No. 130 of 2023, was filed by the Commissioner against a final order dated 06.03.2018 passed by the CESTAT, Chandigarh, in favour of the respondent, M/s Alu Bond Enterprises. The appeal was filed with a delay of 1,318 days, and the appellant accordingly moved a separate application seeking condonation of delay.

Issues Involved

  1. Whether the extraordinary delay of 1,318 days in filing the Central Excise appeal ought to be condoned.

Petitioner's Arguments (Department)

  • Learned counsel for the appellant fairly conceded that an identical issue and similar grounds for condonation of delay had already been considered by a Division Bench of the same High Court in CEA No. 10/2020, where the delay was not condoned and the appeal was dismissed as barred by limitation.

Respondent's Arguments

  • No specific submissions of the respondent are recorded in this order, which was disposed of on the appellant's own concession regarding the earlier precedent.

Court Order / Findings

  • The Court held that its earlier Division Bench order dated 23.05.2022 in CEA No. 10/2020, declining to condone delay on similar grounds, applied on all fours to the present application.
  • Accordingly, without independently re-examining the merits, the Court dismissed CEA No. 130 of 2023 as barred by limitation, applying reasoning from its own prior binding order.

Important Clarification

This is a threshold dismissal on limitation grounds alone — the Court did not examine or record any findings on the underlying central excise dispute between the Department and the assessee. It follows an earlier co-ordinate ruling declining condonation of delay on similar facts, and illustrates that a very long, unexplained delay in departmental appeals will ordinarily not be condoned merely because the delay-condonation grounds mirror a previously rejected application. The case has no bearing on GST law.

Sections Involved

  • Section 35G, Central Excise Act, 1944 — Appeal to High Court
  • Section 5, Limitation Act, 1963 — Condonation of delay (as applied to the appeal)

Decision – In Favour of Respondent (Assessee)

The appeal filed by the Department was dismissed as barred by limitation, without any adjudication on the merits of the underlying central excise dispute; the result favoured the respondent-assessee only on the threshold limitation issue.

Case Details

  • Court: High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh at Jammu
  • Case No.: CEA No. 130 of 2023
  • Coram: Hon'ble the Chief Justice N. Kotiswar Singh and Hon'ble Ms. Justice Moksha Khajuria Kazmi
  • Date of Order: 06 November 2023

Link to Download the Order

Click here to view/download the full order

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.