M/S Prime Steel Industries PVT LTD vs. Union Of INDIA And Others

CWP/6069/2024HC Himachal PradeshGSTCNR HPHC01025756202407 May 2026Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIVEK SINGH THAKUR,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJAN SHARMA4 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

Held

The Court directed the competent authority to consider the petitioner's objections and reply to the show cause notice, along with supporting documents, within 28 days. A speaking and reasoned order was to be passed within 6 weeks thereafter.

Facts

The petitioner sought to quash a show cause notice denying Input Tax Credit (ITC) and directing the respondents not to proceed further. The petitioner argued that the notice was issued without ASMT-10 and that they had paid tax to sellers and possessed necessary documents for ITC.

Key Issues

Whether the show cause notice for denying Input Tax Credit was validly issued and whether the petitioner is entitled to ITC based on their documentation and payment of tax to sellers.

Sections Cited

None explicitly mentioned as discussed in detail, but the context relates to denial of Input Tax Credit and show cause notices.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

1 2026:HHC:15344

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 6069 of 2024 Date of decision: 10.07.2026. M/s Prime Steel Industries Pvt Ltd ...Petitioner. Versus Union of India & Ors.

…Respondents. Corum Hon’ble Mr. Justice Vivek Singh Thakur, Judge. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ranjan Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner : Mr. J.S Bedi, Advocate (through V.C) & Mr. Rajesh Parmar, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Bharat Bhushan, Senior Penal Counsel, for respondent No.

1.

Mr.Anup Rattan, Advocate General, with Mr. Sushant Keprate, Additional Advocate General & Mr. Raj Negi, Deputy Advocate General, for respondents No. 2-State Mr. Vijay Kumar Arora, Senior Advocate with Mr. Hitansh Raj, Mr. Ankit Chauhan and Ms. Avantika Bhandari Advocates for respondents No.3 to 6- CGST Department.

Vivek Singh Thakur, Judge (Oral) Petitioner has approached this Court seeking following main substantial relief(s):- “(i) For issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing respondents not to proceed further in pursuance to show cause notice no.VIDE DIN202208DNN3000000AA88 dated 31.08.2022 as the show ca

The judgment continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

Reproduced from the public record of the Himachal Pradesh High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.