Date of Order: 11 August 2025
Parties: M/s Sai Sitaram Construction v. Joint Commissioner of CT & GST & Anr.

Facts -

• The petitioner, a registered dealer under OGST/CGST, was earlier subjected to adjudication for April–September 2021, resulting in a demand of ₹21,38,338, which was finalized through an order dated 01.12.2022 under Section 73(9) of the OGST Act and duly paid. Subsequently, by a fresh order dated 11.04.2025, the department raised a demand of ₹51,39,498 for the period April 2021–March 2022.
• This fresh demand again included the previously adjudicated amount of ₹21,38,338, effectively subjecting the petitioner to double taxation. The petitioner challenged the demand before the Orissa High Court, arguing that once liability for a specific period is adjudicated and paid, it cannot be reopened in a later overlapping assessment.

Issue-

• Whether the tax authority can re-demand an amount already adjudicated and recovered for a specific tax period by including it in a subsequent overlapping assessment?

Order -

• The Single bench of the Hon’ble High court observed that finality of adjudication is a settled principle of fiscal law. Once a demand for a period is adjudicated and paid, the same cannot be reopened unless the earlier order is lawfully assessed. Inclusion of the same ₹21,38,338 in the fresh demand for April 2021–March 2022 amounted to duplication and double taxation.
• The State itself admitted the error of duplication. Accordingly, the Court quashed the impugned order to the extent of the duplicated demand, while allowing the rest of the assessment to stand.