Order Date – 05 April 2024

Parties: M/s. Satyam Castings Pvt. Ltd. Vs Deputy Director, DGGI, Bhubaneswar and another, Senior Intelligence Officer, Directorate General of GST, Bhubaneswar and nother

Facts –

• The Petitioner, M/s. Satyam Castings Pvt. Ltd., is a private limited company, and registered as a medium scale industry for manufacture of caste iron products. An investigation was carried by the Senior Intelligence Officer, Directorate General of GST, Bhubaneswar (opposite party No.1) and seized certain records and books of accounts and issued summons.
• The Petitioner submits that the opposite party No.1 did not pass any order on the petitioner‟s response to the summons issued, even after a lapse of 15 days.  Also submitted that a verification proceeding being pending before the State Government, the Officers of the Central Tax Authority ought not to have initiated the proceedings with the issuance of the summons.

Issue –

• Whether the proceedings initiated by the State Government and Central Government are valid?

Order –

• The Divisional Bench of Hon’ble High Court observed that there is no ambiguity in the language of Section 6(2)(b) of the CGST/OGST Act, which bars initiation of proceeding by a proper officer under CGST Act where a proper officer under the State Goods and Services Act or the Union territory Goods and Services Tax Act has initiated proceeding on a subject matter.
• It is the specific ground on behalf of opposite party No.1 that the Central GST authority had initiated investigation of suppression of transaction by the petitioner. The DGGI was investigating clandestine supply by the petitioner during the month of March, 2022 only whereas investigation by CT and GST was with reference to receipt of materials from one supplier i.e. M/s. Anamika Enterprises.
• Be that as it may, in view the nature of the order which was intended to pass in the present matter, the Court refrain from recording any definite opinion that the impugned show cause notice issued by the DGGI is barred or not by virtue of operation of Section 6(2)(b) of the CGST/OGST, Act considering the dispute raised in this regard on behalf of opposite parties No.1 and 2.
• Further, in the present case, a show cause-cum-demand notice has already been issued on 29.12.2023. Such being the position, the court declined to interfere in the present matter. The petitioner shall have the liberty to respond to the said show cause-cum-demand notice dated 29.12.2023 and take appropriate recourse to the provisions of the CGST Act.