Case Details: Tansam Engineering and Construction Company Versus Commissioner, CGST and Central Excise, Rourkela (2025) 35 Centax 155 (Ori.)
Judiciary and Counsel Details
- Harish Tandon, CJ. & Murahari Sri Raman, J.
- S/Shri Rudra Prasad Kar, Sr. Adv., Madhab Lal Agarwal, Ms Zenish Mary Wallace & Pankaj Khandelwal, Advs., for the Petitioner.
- S/Shri Sunil Mishra, Standing Counsel, Seshadeb Das, CT & GST Organisation & Avinash Kedia, Junior Standing Counsel (CGST), for the Respondent.
Facts of the Case
The petitioner a registered works contractor under GST, was issued show cause notices and orders by both the State and Central GST authorities on the same allegations of wrongful input tax credit (ITC) availed on invoices issued by non-existent suppliers, M.G. International and M.S. Traders. The State GST officer had first initiated proceedings under Section 74 of the OGST/CGST Act in July 2021, which culminated in adjudication and appellate orders. Despite this, the DGGI issued another show cause notice in August 2021 for the same periods and allegations, leading to an Order-in-Original and DRC-07s by the Central authority in January 2025. The petitioner contended that such parallel proceedings were barred under Section 6(2)(b) of the GST Act and sought to quash the Central proceedings.
High Court Held
The Orissa High Court held that Section 6(2)(b) of the CGST/OGST Act prohibits initiation of parallel proceedings by one authority when another has already initiated proceedings on the same subject matter. Referring to the Supreme Court ruling in Armour Security (India) Ltd. v. Commissioner, CGST (2025) 33 Centax 222 (SC), the Court clarified that only the issuance of a show cause notice constitutes initiation of proceedings, not prior steps like summons or inquiry. Since the State authority had issued show cause notices earlier on identical allegations and periods, the subsequent action by the DGGI was without jurisdiction. Consequently, the Central show cause notice dated 13-08-2021, the Order-in-Original dated 30-01-2025, and related DRC-07 summaries were quashed as invalid and inoperative.
List of Cases Cited
- Armour Security (India) Ltd. v. Commissioner, CGST, Delhi East Commissionerate — (2025) 33 Centax 222 [2025] 177 taxmann.com 478/2025 111 GST 400 (SC) — Referred [Para 4.2]
- Badrinath v. State of Tamil Nadu — (2000) 8 SCC 395 — Referred [Para 8.7]
- Devendra Kumar v. State of Uttaranchal — (2013) 9 SCC 363 — Referred [Para 8.8]
- Maa Tarini Traders v. State of Odisha — (2024) 19 Centax 232 (Ori.) [2024] 163 taxmann.com 376 (Orissa) — Referred [Para 2.3]
- Tansam Engineering and Construction Company v. Chief Commissioner of CT and GST, Cuttack — [W.P. (C) No. 13235 of 2024, dated 19-6-2024] — Referred [Para 2.2]
