Prior CGST proceedings bar parallel State GST action, leading to quashing of the State order.

Where CGST proceedings had already been initiated on the same subject matter, State GST authorities could not validly continue parallel action after the jurisdictional objection under section 6(2)(b) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The petitioner relied on prior CGST coverage of the dispute, and the respondents accepted that the State notice was subsequent to those proceedings. In these circumstances, the State GST order was not sustainable and was quashed and set aside, with the proceedings allowed to continue before the CGST authorities in accordance with law.

---

---

Issues: Whether the State GST proceedings and the consequential order were liable to be set aside in view of prior initiation of proceedings by the CGST authorities under section 6(2)(b) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.

Analysis: The petitioner objected that the subject matter had already been covered by earlier CGST proceedings and, despite the jurisdictional objection based on section 6(2)(b) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, the State GST authorities proceeded to pass the impugned order. The respondents acknowledged that the State notice was issued subsequent to the CGST proceedings and expressed readiness to withdraw the same or have it set aside. In this position, the impugned State action could not be sustained.

Conclusion: The State GST order was quashed and set aside, and the proceedings were permitted to continue before the CGST authorities in accordance with law.

---