Parallel GST adjudication barred on same subject matter, while summons may continue as investigative steps until adjudication begins.

Section 6(2)(b) of the CGST Act bars parallel adjudicatory proceedings on the same subject matter by Central and State tax authorities, but investigative steps such as summons do not by themselves amount to commencement of adjudication. Where overlap is possible, the authorities must verify the subject matter, coordinate inter se, and avoid duplicate proceedings. The taxpayer must comply with lawful summons and place relevant documents and contentions before the concerned authority. The matter was disposed of with directions to ensure coordination, compliance, and protection against multiple adjudicatory processes, without any decision on the merits or on the validity of the summons or notices.

---

---

Issues: Whether parallel GST proceedings on the same subject matter were barred by Section 6(2)(b) of the CGST Act, and what directions were required to regulate the inquiry and adjudication between Central and State tax authorities.

Analysis: The binding principles laid down on the scope of Section 6(2)(b) were applied. The prohibition operates against initiation of proceedings on the same subject matter, but investigative steps such as summons do not by themselves amount to the commencement of adjudicatory proceedings. Where Central and State authorities have both taken action, the authorities must verify overlap, coordinate inter se, and avoid duplicate adjudication. The petitioner was required to comply with lawful summons and place all contentions and documents before the concerned authority, while the authorities were directed to coordinate so that no multiple adjudicatory process proceeds on the same subject matter.

Conclusion: The petition was disposed of with directions to the petitioner and the tax authorities to proceed in accordance with the governing principles and to avoid parallel adjudicatory proceedings on the same subject matter.

Final Conclusion: The matter ended with procedural directions ensuring compliance, coordination, and protection against duplication of proceedings, without any adjudication on the merits of the allegations or the validity of the impugned summons or notices.

Ratio Decidendi: Section 6(2)(b) bars only parallel adjudicatory proceedings on the same subject matter, while investigative steps such as summons may continue until a formal adjudicatory proceeding is shown to have been initiated.

---