Ravi Steel Industries Vs Union of India (Bombay High Court)
The Bombay High Court addressed a petition filed by Ravi Steel Industries challenging a Show Cause Notice (SCN) dated August 6, 2024, and a preceding notice dated October 4, 2023, issued by Central GST Authorities. These notices proposed to deny the petitioner’s credit under the CGST Act for the period spanning 2017-2018 to 2022-2023.
The petitioner’s counsel argued that for the years 2017-2018 and 2018-2019, State GST Authorities had already initiated proceedings, which resulted in an adjudication order currently pending appeal. Relying on Section 6(2)(b) of the CGST Act and the Supreme Court’s decision in Armour Security (India) Ltd, the petitioner contended that the Central Authorities lacked jurisdiction to re-adjudicate demands for these specific, already covered years due to the prior State proceedings.
The Central Authorities’ counsel confirmed that the impugned notices covered a larger period beyond the two disputed years. While submitting that the petitioner had not initially disclosed the State proceedings, the counsel stated that the Central Authorities would consider the details if furnished, and the jurisdictional bar would not apply to the remaining uncovered years.
The High Court acknowledged that the Armour Security decision prima facie supported the petitioner’s argument regarding the years 2017-2018 and 2018-2019. The court accepted that the Central Authorities were at liberty to proceed with adjudication for the years not covered by the State proceedings. However, concerning the two covered years, the court issued a direction: the petitioner must provide the Central Authorities with full details, including copies of the State orders and pending appeals. The Central Authorities are directed to consider the petitioner’s jurisdictional contentions concerning these two years in accordance with law and on their own merits. The petition was disposed of without quashing the SCN, but with binding directions to the Central Authorities.
