Case Law Details
Jindal Photo Limited Vs Commissioner of C.E. & S.T. Jammu (CESTAT Chandigarh)
The Jindal Photo Limited vs. Commissioner of C.E. & S.T. Jammu case before the CESTAT Chandigarh presents a crucial legal precedent regarding the impact of past decisions and their finality in tax matters. In this case, the appellant, Jindal Photo Limited, filed a refund claim for Education Cess and S&H Education Cess under exemption Notification No. 56/2002-CE. The original authority rejected the claim, citing that the Education Cess and S&H Education Cess were levied under the Finance Act, 2004 & Finance Act, 2007, respectively, and not under the mentioned notification.
Upon appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) dismissed the appeal due to non-deposit of mandatory pre-deposit. However, the matter was remanded back to the Commissioner (Appeals) by the CESTAT, emphasizing that it was a case of rejection of a refund claim. Concurrently, parallel proceedings for recovery of erroneously claimed refunds were adjudicated, leading to the deposition of the entire demand amount.
Subsequently, the CESTAT ruled in favor of Jindal Photo Limited, granting them the right to refund the Education Cess and S&H Education Cess. This decision was based on the precedent set by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the SRD Nutrients case. The appellant then sought a refund of the deposited amount, which was granted by the original authority.
However, in the impugned order dated 21.10.2021, the Commissioner (Appeals) dismissed Jindal Photo Limited’s appeal on merits, relying on the Unicorn Industries case. The appellant contended that the SRD Nutrients precedent should prevail, as they had already been granted a refund based on that decision. They argued that subsequent decisions, such as Unicorn Industries, should not affect past decisions that had attained finality.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
