Two Adjudication Orders Against One Show Cause Notice For The Same Period Is Not Permissible: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court stated that two adjudication orders against one show cause notice for the same period is not permissible.The Division Bench of Justices Yashwant Varma and Ravinder Dudeja was dealing with a case where a show-cause notice had been issued to the assessee under Section 74 of the CGST Act, 2017. This notice was duly adjudicated by the department, resulting in an order....
The Delhi High Court stated that two adjudication orders against one show cause notice for the same period is not permissible.
The Division Bench of Justices Yashwant Varma and Ravinder Dudeja was dealing with a case where a show-cause notice had been issued to the assessee under Section 74 of the CGST Act, 2017. This notice was duly adjudicated by the department, resulting in an order.
The assessee filed an appeal against this order, which was pending before the proper officer. During the pendency of the appeal, however, the department adjudicated the same show-cause notice once again and issued a subsequent order (dated 23.04.2024) based on the same allegations, under the same section, raising the same demand.
The assessee submitted that both the orders have the reference of the same show cause notice which means that issuance of second order (dated 23.04.2024) is nothing but double jeopardy. The issuance of second order on the same show cause notice is nothing but gross misuse of power by the department as the order has been passed without authority of law and without any basis or reasoning.
The bench stated that “We take note of what prima facie appears to be an apparent mistake underlying the passing of the impugned order dated 23 April 2024, a decision which pertains to the tax period of July 2018 to March 2019……….However, notwithstanding those proceedings having culminated in the passing of a final order, the impugned order dated 23 April 2024 has come to be framed all over again pertaining to the same tax period and referring to the original Show Cause Notice dated 30 December 2020……...”
The bench opined that the second order is not sustainable.
In view of the above, the bench allowed the petition and quashed the second order.
Counsel for Petitioner/ Assessee: R.P. Singh, Anant Vijay and Yash Agarwal
Counsel for Respondent/ Department: Udit Malik and Vishal Chanda
Case Title: M/s Jain Cement Udyog (Through Its Proprietor Sh. Sanjay Jain) v. Sales Tax Officer Class-II
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1188
Case Number: W.P.(C) 12860/2024