Himachal Pradesh High Court
M/S Prime Steel Industries Pvt. Ltd vs State Of H.P. & Ors on 13 May, 2025
Bench: Tarlok Singh Chauhan, Sushil Kukreja
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA
CWP No. 7846/2025
Decided on : 13.05.2025
M/s Prime Steel Industries Pvt. Ltd. .....Petitioner.
Versus
State of H.P. & ors. ....Respondents
Coram:
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan, Judge.
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sushil Kukreja, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting?1No
For the Petitioner: Mr. Shrawan Dogra, Sr. Advocate with
Mr. Manik Sethi, Advocate.
.
For the Respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, A.G. with Mr.
I.N.Mehta, Sr. Addl. A.G. Mr. Ramakant
Sharma, Mr. Navlesh Verma, Ms.
Sharmila Patial, Mr. Sushant Kaprate,
Addl. A.Gs. and Mr. Raj Negi, Dy.A.G. for
respondents No. 1 to 4.
Mr. Vijay Kumar Arora, Sr. Advocate
with Ms. Godawari, Ms. Lalita Sharma,
Mr. Gaurav Kumar and Mr. Hitansh Raj,
Advocates, for respondents No. 5 to 8.
____________________________________________________________
1Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes.
2
Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan, Judge (oral)
Notice. Ms. Sharmila Patial, learned Additional Advocate General and Ms. Godawari, Advocate, accept and waive service of notice on behalf of the respective respondents. 2 The instant petition has been filed for grant of the following substantive relief:
A writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ to quash and set aside the Impugned Proceedings initiated by virtue of communications dated 25.04.2025 (Annexure P-2 to Annexure P-7) issued in terms of Rule 142 (1A) of the GST Rules 2017 under Form DRC-01A for financial year 2019-2020, 2020-2021, 2021-2022, 2022-
2023, 2023-2024 & 2024-2025 along with all consequential proceedings initiated against the petitioner (if any) by the respondent No.1 in furtherance to the said impugned proceedings.
3 Learned Advocate General has placed on record communication dated 13.5.2025. It shall be apt to reproduce this communication in its entirety and the same reads as under:
"This is with reference to the subject cited above. It is to inform you that the petitioner has challenged the initiation of the proceedings under section 74 of the GST Act 2017, which was initiated through this office by issuance of the DRC-01A 3 from FY 2019-2025 for FY 2019-2020, 2020-2021; 2021- 2022, 2022-2023; 2023-2024 & 2024-2025.
The proceedings were initiated on account of the availment of inadmissible ITC on account of non-
existent/bogus/cancelled suo-moto suppliers/cancelled retrospectively suppliers and any other doubtful suppliers for the respective financial years.
That the RTP/Petitioner has participated in the proceedings and submitted all documentary evidence to show the genuineness of the purchases being undertaken by the suppliers mentioned in the respective notices issued to the RTP/Petitioner. The RTP/Petitioner gave its detailed reply and along with its detailed reply has also filed a supplementary reply. The RTP/Petitioner has uploaded soft copy of sample documents on the GST portal and also filed the physical copy of all the documents related to all the Suppliers mentioned in the respective notices and has also participated in the personal hearing. It is also to bring to your knowledge that for F.Y. 2021-22, the RTP/Petitioner voluntarily deposited the tax vide DRC-03 along with interest and penalty amounting to Rs. 16,00,832/- on account of non-filing of GSTR-3B by one of the suppliers & for F.Y. 2022-23, the RTP/Petitioner voluntarily deposited the tax vide DRC-03 along with interest and penalty amounting to Rs. 6,28,744/- and Rs. 34,92,228/-on account of the non- filing of GSTR-3B by two suppliers which is duły accepted by this office.
After going through the above and after satisfying myself with the genuineness of the above, this is to inform you that all proceedings have been dropped related to the above notices issued to the RTP/Petitioner as the RTP/Petitioner 4 has complied with all the conditions in terms of Section 16(2) of the GST Act related to all the supplies mentioned in the Notices issued by this office and that the RTP/Petitioner has also discharged its duty beyond reasonable doubt in terms of Section 155 of the GST Act."
4 Now that the respondents themselves have dropped all the proceedings against the petitioner in terms of Section 16 (2) of the GST Act, related to all the supplies mentioned in the aforesaid notices and have concluded that the petitioner has discharged its duty beyond reasonable doubt in terms of Section 155 of the GST Act, the instant petition is rendered infructuous and stands disposed of accordingly. Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of.
(Tarlok Singh Chauhan) Judge (Sushil Kukreja) 13.5.2025 Judge (pankaj)