Facts of the Case

This is a Central Excise matter and does not turn on any GST provision, despite the appellant department being styled the "Commissioner of Central GST and Central Excise" (the post that today also administers legacy Central Excise matters). The Commissioner of Central GST and Central Excise, Jammu, filed this appeal under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944, against a final order of CESTAT, Chandigarh, in favour of the respondent, M/s JSB Aluminium.

The appeal came up before a Division Bench of the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh at Jammu on 08.05.2023, and the appellant's counsel fairly conceded that the issue was identical to several other Excise Appeals already decided by the same Court in its judgment dated 23.05.2022 in the leading case, CEA No.10 of 2020.

Issues Involved

  1. Whether any distinguishing ground existed to depart from the Court's own earlier decision in CEA No.10 of 2020 on an identical Central Excise question.

Petitioner's Arguments

  • Counsel for the appellant-Commissioner did not press any new ground, fairly conceding that the matter was squarely covered by the Court's earlier decision dated 23.05.2022 in CEA No.10 of 2020.

Respondent's Arguments

No separate submission is recorded for the respondent, M/s JSB Aluminium, since the appeal was disposed of on the appellant's own concession that it was covered by precedent.

Court Order / Findings

  • The Court held that, since no new ground was available to the appellant, the matter stood squarely covered by its earlier decision dated 23.05.2022 in CEA No.10 of 2020.
  • The appeal was accordingly dismissed on the same terms and conditions as laid down in that earlier decision.

Important Clarification

This order applies Central Excise Act, 1944 principles to a legacy dispute; it contains no interpretation of any GST provision. The department's post-2017 nomenclature — "Commissioner of Central GST and Central Excise" — should not be mistaken for GST subject matter. Readers researching GST case law should disregard this order for that purpose; it is only relevant to practitioners tracking the CEA No.10/2020 line of Central Excise precedent in the J&K and Ladakh High Court.

Sections Involved

  • Section 35G, Central Excise Act, 1944

Decision – In Favour of

Decided against the appellant-Commissioner; the appeal was dismissed, applying the Court's own binding precedent in CEA No.10 of 2020.

Case Details

  • Court: High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh at Jammu
  • Case No.: CEA No.68 of 2023 (with CM Nos.2631/2023 & 2632/2023)
  • Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Tashi Rabstan and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Puneet Gupta
  • Date of Order: 08.05.2023

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.