Facts of the Case

M/s. D.R. Patnaik challenged an Order-in-Original dated 20.02.2025 and the consequential Summary Order dated 24.02.2025 passed by the Additional Commissioner, GST & Central Excise, Rourkela Commissionerate, under Section 73 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017/Odisha Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The impugned proceedings raised a tax demand of Rs.2,34,83,584/- for the financial year 2020-21, along with a penalty of Rs.23,48,358/-. Aggrieved, the petitioner approached the Orissa High Court under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution.

Issues Involved

  1. Whether the Order-in-Original and Summary Order dated 20.02.2025 and 24.02.2025, passed under Section 73 of the GST Act, were liable to be set aside.
  2. Whether the matter deserved to be remitted for fresh adjudication in terms identical to a companion writ petition disposed of on the same day.

Petitioner's Arguments

  • The controversy in the present petition was materially identical to the challenge raised in W.P.(C) No.14904 of 2025, disposed of by the same Bench on the same date.
  • In that companion matter, the Order-in-Original along with the Summary Order had been set aside and the matter remitted to the adjudicating authority for fresh adjudication.
  • On parity, the impugned orders in the present case ought to be set aside and remitted on the same terms.

Respondent's Arguments

  • The Senior Standing Counsel for CGST raised no objection to the relief sought, effectively conceding the parity plea advanced by the petitioner.

Court Order / Findings

  • Noting the conceded position of both sides, the Court held that the present writ petition should be disposed of in the same terms as the order passed earlier that day in W.P.(C) No.14904 of 2025.
  • The impugned Order-in-Original dated 20.02.2025 and the Summary Order dated 24.02.2025 were accordingly set aside.
  • The matter was remitted to the concerned adjudicating authority for re-adjudication in accordance with law.

Important Clarification

  • Where the facts of a writ petition are materially indistinguishable from those already decided by the Court in a companion matter on the same day, and the Revenue does not object, courts will readily extend identical relief without a fresh, detailed examination of the record.

Sections Involved

  • Section 73 of the CGST Act, 2017/OGST Act, 2017 — determination of tax not paid or short paid, or input tax credit wrongly availed or utilised, for reasons other than fraud, wilful misstatement or suppression of facts.

Decision – In Favour of

Assessee. The Order-in-Original and Summary Order were set aside and the matter remitted for fresh adjudication, in favour of M/s. D.R. Patnaik.

Case Details

High Court of Orissa at Cuttack; W.P.(C) No.15252 of 2025; Coram: Justice Biraja Prasanna Satapathy and Justice Murahari Sri Raman; Order dated 04.06.2025.

Link to Download the Order

Click here to view/download the full order

Disclaimer

This content is shared strictly for general information and knowledge purposes only. Readers should independently verify the information from reliable sources. It is not intended to provide legal, professional, or advisory guidance. The author and the organisation disclaim all liability arising from the use of this content. The material has been prepared with the assistance of AI tools.