No Simultaneous GST Audit by State & Central Tax Agencies: Madras HC Interim Stays Notice to ArcelorMittal Nippon Steel [Read Order]
Justice Mohammed Shaffiq observed that the petitioner has made out a prima facie case warranting intervention.
ArcelorMittal - Nippon - steel - Taxscan
ArcelorMittal - Nippon - steel - Taxscan
The Madras High Court recently granted an interim stay of a Form GST ADT-01 notice issued to ArcelorMittal Nippon Steel India Pvt. Ltd. (ArcelorMittal), affirming that the central and state Goods and Services Tax (GST) departments cannot simultaneously conduct audit proceedings on the same issue.
The petition arose after ArcelorMittal replied to the Notice in Form GST ADT-01, which had called upon them to appear before the GST department office at Chennai and produce certain documents for the period 2018-2019 to 2022-2023 as required for conducting GST Audit.
Know Practical Aspects of Tax Planning, Click Here
The petitioner informed the Central authority that the company was then under audit by the State tax authorities and relied on the bar against duplicate proceedings under Section 6(2)(b) of the CGST Act, relying on the Supreme Court decision in SLP(C) No.6092of 2025 - Armour Security (India) Ltd. vs. Commissioner, CGST, Delhi EastCommissionerate.
Srinath Sridevan and P.J. Rishikesh appearing for the petitioner informed the Court that the State tax officer accepted the petitioner’s position, dropped defects in an earlier show cause and issued Form GST DRC-07 directing payment of penalties of ₹50,000 each for FY 2021-22 and FY 2022-23.
Meanwhile, the Central office issued letters seeking a reply on the alleged availment of excess ITC for FY 2022-23 and 2023-24, leading to the present writ.
Want a deeper insight into the Income Tax Bill, 2025? Click here
Rajenderan Raghavan appeared for the respondents, while V. Prashanth Kiran appeared for the newly impleaded State Tax Officer, Group-XII, Intelligence-II, Chennai – 600 006, as per the direction of the High Court.
Justice Mohammed Shaffiq observed that the impugned notice issued by the central authority has been challenged on the ground that the same suffers from a violation of Section 6(2)(b) of the CGST Act, 2017, and the petitioner has made out a prima facie case.
Accordingly, the Madras High Court held that there shall be an order of interim stay of the impugned Notice in Form GST ADT-01 dated 07.04.2025 issued by the Central GST authority, until the date of the next hearing.
Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscanpremium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
