J.B. Rolling Mills Limited Vs Union of India & Others (Himachal Pradesh High Court)
The petitioner invoked the writ jurisdiction of the Himachal Pradesh High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution, seeking quashing of multiple summons and notices issued by the Central GST authorities, or alternatively, a direction to keep such notices in abeyance until completion of proceedings initiated by the State GST authorities. The core issue before the Court was the applicability of the bar under Section 6(2)(b) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, which prohibits initiation of parallel proceedings on the same subject matter by different GST authorities.
The Court noted that the controversy is no longer res integra in view of the authoritative judgment of the Supreme Court in Armour Security (India) Ltd. v. Commissioner, CGST, Delhi East & Anr., which has comprehensively interpreted the scope of Section 6(2)(b). The Supreme Court clarified that the statutory bar applies only to parallel adjudicatory proceedings on the same subject matter and not to investigative actions such as issuance of summons, search, or seizure. It was further held that “initiation of proceedings” refers to the formal commencement of adjudication through issuance of a show cause notice, and that the “subject matter” relates to the specific tax liability, deficiency, or contravention sought to be adjudicated.
