Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + HC Central Excise - 2022 (5) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (5) TMI 1644 - HC - Central ExciseIssues: - Consideration of a question of law already decided by a co-ordinate Bench - Application of the ratio in a previous case to the current appeal The judgment by the High Court of Rajasthan involved the consideration of a question of law that had already been decided by a co-ordinate Bench in a previous case. The learned counsels for both parties jointly submitted that the issue at hand had been addressed and resolved in a specific order dated 19.01.2022 in a different appeal. The Court noted that in the previous case, the appeal by the Revenue had been dismissed based on the established ratio from the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Bangalore Vs. PNB Metlife India Insurance Co. Ltd. The Court emphasized that there was no room for deviation from the precedent set in the aforementioned case. Consequently, the Court found the current appeal to be without merit and ordered its dismissal based on the established legal principles. In this judgment, the High Court of Rajasthan, comprising HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR. MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA AND HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN, considered the submission made by the counsels for both the Appellant and the Respondent. The legal issue brought before the Court was whether the question of law raised in the present case had already been addressed in a previous ruling by a co-ordinate Bench. The Court noted that the specific question had indeed been dealt with in a prior order dated 19.01.2022 in a different case. The Court then highlighted the decision of the co-ordinate Bench in the earlier case, where the appeal by the Revenue had been dismissed. The Court cited the precedent established in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Bangalore Vs. PNB Metlife India Insurance Co. Ltd., emphasizing that the same ratio applied to the current appeal. Consequently, the Court found no merit in the present appeal and proceeded to dismiss it in accordance with the established legal principles and precedents.
|