CGST Barred from Re-Adjudicating Matter Decided by SGST | HC

Case Details: Shanti Swaroop Nikhil Kumar vs. Additional Commissioner CGST North - [2025] 175 taxmann.com 545 (Delhi)

Judiciary and Counsel Details

• Pratibha M. Singh & Rajneesh Kumar Gupta, JJ.
• Abhimanyu Jhamba, Ms Thonpinao Thangal & Ms Ayushi Srivastava, Advs. for the Petitioner.
• Vijay Joshi, Sr. Standing Council & Hemant Goyal, Adv. for the Respondent.

Facts of the Case

The petitioner, a registered taxable person, was issued a show cause notice by the jurisdictional officer under the CGST Act alleging fraudulent availment of input tax credit involving six entities. It was submitted that proceedings concerning one of those entities had already been initiated and adjudicated by the jurisdictional officer under the Delhi GST Act, and an order had been passed on the same subject matter. The petitioner contended that initiation of a second proceeding by the CGST authority on the identical issue violated Section 6(2)(b) of the CGST Act, which bars concurrent jurisdiction once proceedings have been initiated by one authority. The matter was accordingly placed before the Delhi High Court.

High Court Held

The Delhi High Court held that Section 6(2)(b) of the CGST Act clearly prohibits initiation of proceedings by CGST officers where proceedings on the same subject matter have already been initiated by the SGST authorities. The Court found that, in this case, the subject had been adjudicated by the Delhi GST authorities, and thus any subsequent proceeding by CGST authorities on the same matter was impermissible. Emphasising the statutory intent to avoid multiplicity of adjudication and conflict in tax administration, the Court quashed the impugned CGST order. The petitioner was permitted to approach the appellate authority.