TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (11) TMI 1873
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....R, JUDGE Petitioner, invoking provisions of Article 226 of the Constitution of India, has filed the present Writ Petition, praying for the substantive reliefs: i) That impugned notices as contained in Ann P-6 and subsequent notices/summons and Ann P-15 may kindly be quashed and set aside; (ii) Alternatively respondent No. 4 may kindly be directed to keep the Ann P-15 in abeyance till the respondent No.3 completes its proceedings as initiated u/s 70 of the Act." 2. Main issue involved in present Writ Petition is related to prohibition contained in Section 6(2)(b) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 ("CGST Act"), against initiation of parallel proceedings on the same subject-matter, despite an earlier initi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e meaning of Section 6(2)(b) of the CGST Act. vi. The expression "initiation of any proceedings" occurring in Section 6(2)(b) refers to the formal commencement of adjudicatory proceedings by way of issuance of a show cause notice, and does not encompass the issuance of summons, or the conduct of any search, or seizure etc. vii. The expression "subject matter" refers to any tax liability, deficiency, or obligation arising from any particular contravention which the Department seeks to assess or recover. viii. Where any two proceedings initiated by the Department seek to assess or recover an identical or a partial overlap in the tax liability, deficiency or obligation arising from any particular contravention, the b....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... has initiated the subsequent inquiry or investigation. c. Upon receipt of such intimation from the assessee, the respective tax authorities shall communicate with each other to verify the veracity of the assessee's claim. We say, so as this course of action would obviate needless duplication of proceedings and ensure optimal utilization of the Department's time, effort, and resources, bearing in mind that action initiated by one authority enures to benefit of all. d. If the claim of the taxable person regarding the overlap of inquiries is found untenable, and the investigations of the two authorities pertain to different "subject matters", an intimation to this effect, along with the reasons and a specification of the dis....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....inquiry or investigation shall be empowered to carry it to its logical conclusion, and the courts in such a case would be competent to pass an order for transferring the inquiry or investigation to that authority. h. If it is found that the authorities are not complying with these aforementioned guidelines, it shall be open to the taxable person to file a writ petition before the concerned High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. i. At the same time, taxable persons shall ensure complete cooperation with the authorities. It is incumbent upon them to appear in response to a summons and/or reply to a notice." 4. The petitioner has challenged the action of the Central GST authorities in issuing summons un....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rther directions to GST Authorities to decide the same in terms of para 96 and 97 of the Armour case Judgment. 7. The Apex Court, in Armour Security case, has held that once one authority-Central or State-has initiated proceedings first in point of time, any subsequent parallel adjudicatory proceedings on the same cause of action by the other authority are barred under Section 6(2)(b). The Apex Court has emphasized the need to avoid overlapping proceedings and multiplicity, while at the same time clarifying that legitimate investigative steps by either authority may continue so long as they do not result in parallel adjudication. 8. In Armour Security case, referred supra, particularly paras 96 and 97, it has been laid down that once ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ons consistent with the law declared in Armour Security case (supra). 12. Accordingly, petition is disposed of in the following terms: (I) Petitioner is directed to appear before the Central Authority and file the response of Show Cause Notice, so issued, and raise the contentions along with relevant documents in terms of the judgment passed by the Apex Court in Armour case on or before 15.12.2025. (II) With respect to summons and intimations i.e DRC- 01(A) under Rule 142 (1A) of the Act, the petitioner is directed to comply with the summons and raise the contentions available with him including informing the State Authorities regarding issuance of Show Cause Notice in terms of para 97(a) & (b) of the Armour judgment (s....