M/S Shiv Shakti Trading Co. vs. State Of Haryana And Others
Original PDF →No AI summary yet for this judgment.
CWP-2687-2021(O&M) & other connected cases -1- 260 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision: 22.07.2026
CWP-2687-2021(O&M) M/S SHIV SHAKTI TRADING CO. ...Petitioner Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS ...Respondents
CWP-3995-2022(O&M) M/S SADHIL ENTERPRISES PVT LTD ...Petitioner Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS ...Respondents
CWP-14187-2023(O&M) M/S S.S. BUILDERS ...Petitioner Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS ...Respondents
CWP-16062-2023 (O&M) M/S NARULA TOOLS INTERNATIONAL ...Petitioner Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS ...Respondents
CWP-5200-2024 (O&M) M/S KOOL TECH INFRA AND LOGISTICS ...Petitioner Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS ...Respondents
CWP-25935-2024 (O&M)
27 18:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
CWP-2687-2021(O&M) & other connected cases -2- CWP-16447-2025 (O&M) M/S BHATIA INDUSTRIAL CORPORATION ...Petitioner Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ROHIT KAPOOR Present: Mr. Sandeep Goyal, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Rishab Singla, Advocate Ms. Aakriti, Advocate Mr. Aditya Gupta, Advocate Mr. Rishab Bansal, Advocate for the petitioner in CWP-2687-2021, CWP-3995-2021, CWP-14187-2023, CWP-5200-2024 & CWP-16447-2025. Mr. Tarun Gulati, Senior Advocate (through v.c.) with Mr. Sandeep Chilana, Advocate Mr. Priyojeet Chatterjee, Advocate Mr. Tushar Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner in CWP-25935-2024. Mr. Chetan Jain, Advocate and Mr. Porush Jain, Advocate for the petitioner in CWP-16062-2023. Mr. Sourabh Goel, Addl. A.G. Haryana. Mr. Saurabh Kapoor, Addl. A.G., Punjab. Mr. Gurinder Jit Singh, Senior panel counsel for respondent No.2 and 3-CBIC in CWP-2687-2021 & CWP-16062-2023. Mr. Rishabh Kapoor, Senior Standing Counsel for the respondents in CWP-5200-2024. Mr. Ajay Kalra, Senior Standing Counsel with 2026.07.27 18:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
CWP-2687-2021(O&M) & other connected cases -3- Ms. Isha Janjua, Advocate for the respondent-CBIC in CWP-25935-2024 and CWP-16447-2025. *** others, [2024] 124 GSTR 396 (Jharkhand), against which Special Leave Petition (SLP) has also been dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court on 17.04.2026. 2. On 20.07.2026, the following order was passed:- “The counsel for the petitioner(s) placed reliance upon Jamshedpur and others, [2024] 124 GSTR 396 (Jharkhand) Jharkhand & ors. 2025 SCC OnLine Jhar 436, against which the SLP(C) Diary No.18250/2026 has been dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court on 17.04.2026. It is therefore, submitted that this matter can also be disposed of in the same terms. Learned counsel for the respondents-authorities seeks short indulgence to examine the matter. Put up 22.07.2026. A photocopy of this order be placed on the files of connected cases.”
We have heard learned counsel for the parties at substantial length. We find that the issues raised in the present matter have already been adjudicated upon by the Jharkhand High Court in ‘Usha Martin Limited Vs.
27 18:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
CWP-2687-2021(O&M) & other connected cases -4- Additional Commissioner, Central GST and Excise, Jamshedpur and others’, [2024] 124 GSTR 396 (Jharkhand). The said judgment has been followed by a subsequent Bench in ‘Steel Authority of India Limited Vs. State of Jharkhand & ors’. 2025 SCC OnLine Jhar 436. We are in respectful agreement with the view taken therein by the Court.
The judgment in Steel Authority of India Ltd. (supra) was tested before the Hon’ble Supreme Court by the State of Jharkhand, wherein the SLP has been also dismissed.
Once that be the position, we are of the view that the present petitions also deserve to be allowed for the reasons recorded in Usha Martin Limited (supra). The initiation of proceedings under Sections 73 and 74 of the Punjab Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, the Haryana Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, in respect of credits avail in the erstwhile Haryana Value Added Tax (VAT) Act, cannot be adjudicated. It goes without saying that the liberty extended to the Revenue in para 23 of the judgment in Usha Martin Limited (supra) would remain protected in accordance with law.
These petitions are accordingly disposed of.
Pending application(s), if any, stand(s) disposed of. (ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA) ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE
(ROHIT KAPOOR) 22.07.2026 JUDGE neeraj Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes No Whether Reportable : Yes No 2026.07.27 18:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
Reproduced from the public record of the Punjab and Haryana High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.