Breaking Supreme Court Legal Update
New Delhi · Thursday, 30 July 2026 9888666310 | [email protected]
Free Law — free judgments and free headnotes Free Lawby De Jure
Supreme Court of India 2025-08-14 disposed

M/s. Armour Security (India) Ltd vs Commissioner, CGST, Delhi East Commissionerate & Anr

Bench: 2 — J.B. Pardiwala, R. Mahadevan

In Brief

The Supreme Court clarified that under Section 6(2)(b) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, the bar on parallel proceedings applies only when a show cause notice (formal adjudicatory proceedings) has been issued, not merely at the stage of summons or search. The Court held that issuance of summons, search, and seizure are evidence-gathering actions, not formal 'proceedings' within the meaning of Section 6(2)(b). Intelligence-based enforcement action can be initiated by either Central or State tax authorities regardless of taxpayer assignment, but audit and detailed scrutiny of returns must be conducted by the assigned authority. The 'subject matter' is determined by the show cause notice and encompasses specific tax liabilities and contraventions. The Court issued comprehensive guidelines for inter-departmental coordination to avoid duplicative proceedings while ensuring effective tax enforcement and cooperative federalism.

The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.

GST Law Central Goods and Services Tax Act Tax Administration Concurrent Jurisdiction Parallel Proceedings Show Cause Notice Section 6 CGST Act Intelligence-Based Enforcement Tax Liability Determination Administrative Law

Read the full judgment & headnote. It's free.

Register to read the complete Supreme Court judgment text and the headnote, and to search 1 lakh+ Supreme Court judgments by meaning. It is a free service.

Register Free Login