Shubham Propmart PVT LTD vs. Senior Intelligence Officer And Others
Held
The Court disposed of the petition based on a statement made by the learned Advocate General for the respondents. The statement confirmed that henceforth, State Authorities alone would proceed under Section 6(2)(b) of the GST Act, 2017, in conjunction with the CBEC Circular dated 05.10.2018. Consequently, the Court found that nothing further survived for adjudication in the writ petition. As a consequential direction, the Central Authorities were ordered to hand over the entire records of the proceedings to the State Authorities to enable them to proceed. Furthermore, the Court directed that the investigation in the case would be carried out by any competent authority other than the Joint Commissioner presently posted in the State Taxes & Excise, South Enforcement Zone, Parwanoo, District Solan, Himachal Pradesh. No specific issue was expressly left undecided.
Facts
The petitioner, Shubham Propmart Pvt. Ltd., filed a writ petition before the Himachal Pradesh High Court. The respondents included the Senior Intelligence Officer and other authorities. The petition challenged an order or action, though the specific order and tax period are not detailed in the provided text. The core of the dispute appears to revolve around which authority, Central or State, has the jurisdiction to proceed under Section 6(2)(b) of the GST Act, 2017, in light of a CBEC Circular dated 05.10.2018. The procedural history indicates the matter reached the High Court via a writ petition.
Key Issues
1. Whether the State Authorities alone would proceed under Section 6(2)(b) of the GST Act, 2017, read with CBEC Circular dated 05.10.2018? The petitioner sought clarity and potentially a direction regarding the appropriate authority. The respondents, through the learned Advocate General, made a statement that henceforth, State Authorities would exclusively proceed under the aforementioned provision. The petitioner's specific arguments are not detailed, but the filing of the writ petition implies a grievance or uncertainty regarding the proceedings. The respondents' contention, as stated, is that the State Authorities will handle proceedings under Section 6(2)(b) as per the circular.
Sections Cited
Section 6(2)(b)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
( 2025:HHC:15765 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA CWP No.5396 of 2024 Date of decision: 26.05.2025 Shubham Propmart Pvt. Ltd. ….Petitioner Versus Senior Intelligence Officer & Ors.
….Respondents Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan, Judge. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sushil Kukreja, Judge. Whether approved for reporting ?1 No. For the Petitioner: Mr. Vishal Mohan, Senior Advocate with Mr. Ashwani K. Lal, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Vijay Kumar Arora, Senior Advocate with Ms. Godawari, Mr. Gaurav Kumar and Mr. Hitansh Raj, Advocates, for respondents No.1 & 3. Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Ramakant Sharma, Mr. Navlesh Verma, Ms.Sharmila Patial, Additional Advocate Generals, Mr. J.S. Guleria and Mr. Raj Negi, Deputy Advocate Generals, for respondents No.2 & 4/State. Tarlok Singh Chauhan, Judge(Oral): Learned Advocate General, on instructions, from the respondents states that henceforth, it would be the State Authorities alone, who would proceed under Section 6(2)(b) of the GST, Act, 2017 read with CBEC Circular dated 5.10.2018. 2. In this view of the matter, nothing survives for adjudication in this petition. Consequently
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.
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.