Back
Saidalavi – Appellant
Versus
State Tax Officer – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
These writ petitions have been filed by various entities which are admittedly associated with each other in business and essentially belonging to the same group of individuals. While W.P (C) Nos.18127/2020 and 18081/2020 are filed by Private Limited Companies. W.P (C) Nos.18692/2020, 18695/2020 and 18122/2020 are filed by partnership firms and W.P (C) No.18078/2020 filed by one K.T. Saidalavi, Managing Director/Managing Partner of the aforesaid entities.
2. The issue that arises for consideration is short. In all these cases the proper officer under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the CGST Act') had initiated enquiry regarding non-payment of GST and had directed the production of certain records. This was followed by summons issued under Section 70 of the CGST Act leading to the recording of certain statements. Certain records were also produced before the Central Authority. While matters stood thus the State Authority initiated proceedings under Section 74 read with Section 122(1) of the CGST/SGST Acts. According to the petitioners in these cases the initiation of proceedings under Section 74 by the State Authority that culminated in or
Proceedings initiated by one authority under the CGST Act must be concluded by that authority; inquiries do not equate to the initiation of proceedings.
Taxpayer cannot face dual proceedings by Central and State authorities on the same subject-matter under Section 6(2)(b) of the GST Act, establishing a safeguard against double taxation.
Jurisdiction prohibits State authorities from initiating proceedings when Central GST has already initiated consistent inquiries on the same subject matter under Section 6(2)(b) of the CGST Act.
Section 6(2)(b) of the CGST Act and the Circular dated 05.10.2018 have limited application and are not a bar to multiple search operations and summons issued by multiple agencies in certain circumsta....
The court ruled that the Circular and Section 6(2)(b) of the CGST Act do not prevent multiple jurisdictions from conducting unified investigations when necessary, reaffirming the court's discretion t....
Issuance of summons under Section 70 of the CGST Act is not barred by prior proceedings under Section 6(2)(b) of the same Act.
The court established that the authority that initiates tax enforcement proceedings retains jurisdiction to complete the investigation, reinforcing the principle of cross empowerment between Central ....
Dual proceedings concerning the same subject matter initiated by State GST authorities after Central GST proceedings are barred under Section 6(2)(b) of the CGST Act.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
