https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782406 HC held that Section 6(2)(b) of the CGST Act, as interpreted by SC in Armour Security, bars parallel adjudicatory proceedings by Central and State GST authorities on the same cause of action once one authority has first initiated proceedings. As State summons preceded Central summons, HC found no need for further adjudication on merits and disposed of the petition with directions. The petitioner must appear before both authorities, respond to summons, and raise all contentions per Armour Security. State and Central authorities must coordinate, verify claims, and ensure no multiple adjudications on the same subject matter, with further proceedings conducted in accordance with law and after hearing the petitioner. en-us Sat, 22 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 28 Nov 2025 12:49:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782406 HC held that Section 6(2)(b) of the CGST Act, as interpreted by SC in Armour Security, bars parallel adjudicatory proceedings by Central and State GST authorities on the same cause of action once one authority has first initiated proceedings. As State summons preceded Central summons, HC found no need for further adjudication on merits and disposed of the petition with directions. The petitioner must appear before both authorities, respond to summons, and raise all contentions per Armour Security. State and Central authorities must coordinate, verify claims, and ensure no multiple adjudications on the same subject matter, with further proceedings conducted in accordance with law and after hearing the petitioner. Case-Laws GST Sat, 22 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782406