2026 (1) TMI 634

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ORDER: Heard Mr. P. Venkata Prasad, learned counsel representing M/s. P.V. Prasad Associates appearing for the petitioner, Mr. D. Raghavendar Rao, learned Senior Standing Counsel for Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC), appearing for respondent Nos. 1 and 2 and Mr. B. Mukherjee, learned counsel representing Mr. N. Bhujanga Rao, learned Deputy Solicitor General of India appearing for respondent No. 4. 2. For easy reference to gather the substratum of the dispute, the order dated 31.10.2025 and the order dated 20.11.2025 are extracted hereunder: 31.10.2025: "Learned counsel Sri P.Venkata Prasad, representing M/s.P.V.Prasad Associates, appears for the petitioner. Sri D.Raghavendar Rao, learn....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....025 against the petitioner for the financial year 2021-22 is on three counts, which read as under: "3. Excess availment of Input Tax Credit (ITC) of Rs.2,28,450/- (IGST: Rs. 30,890.-, CGST: Rs. 98,780/- & SGST: Rs. 98,780/-) in GSTR-3B in comparison with ITC available in GSTR-2A, (GSTR 3B vs 2A)." "4. The taxpayer has claimed ITC of Rs. 96,08,924/- (CGST: Rs. 48,04,462/- & SGST: Rs. 48,04,462/-) in respect of supplies received from taxpayer whose registration has been cancelled suo- moto retrospectively." "5. Irregular availment of Blocked/ineligible credit of Rs. 19,573/- (IGST: Rs. 2,285/-, CGST: 8,644/- & SGST: Rs. 8,644/-) during the period 2021-22 for contravention of provisions of Section 17(5) of the CGST A....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....f the CGST Act. Learned counsel for the respondent submits that the subject matter of both the proceedings do not overlap. Separate proceedings for penalty under Section 122 and irregular and illegal availment of ITC under Section 74(1) of the CGST Act can be initiated by the State and Central tax authorities. On consideration of the rival submissions of the parties and in the aforesaid facts and circumstances, we are of the view that since the penalty proceedings have concluded and the petitioner has preferred an appeal and whereas the proceedings before the CGST authorities are yet to be concluded, the show cause notice dated 19.09.2025 issued by respondent No.1 be kept in abeyance till the appeal preferred by the petiti....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....er on the show cause notice dated 19.09.2025 after consideration of petitioner's reply, but only after the Appellate Authority of the State Tax concludes the appeal proceedings in respect of the show cause notice under Section 122 of the CGST/TGST Act. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has made strenuous efforts to convince us that since a question of overlap of proceedings, be it under Section 73 or 74 of the CGST/TGST and Section 122 of the CGST/TGST Act, is involved, the matter may be decided by this Court itself. 6. However, at this stage, we refrain from expressing any final opinion in the matter. Taking into account the submission of the parties, this Court had kept the show cause notice dated 19.09.2025 issued by Central Ta....