Conflicting GST Orders for Same Period Quashed by Delhi High Court

Case Summary:

Case Title: Siemens Limited vs. Sales Tax Officer/GST Officer & Ors.
Court Name: High Court of Delhi at New Delhi
Petition No.: W.P.(C) 9213/2024 and CM APPL. 41290/2024
Date of Judgement: 22.11.2024
Category of Dispute: Assessment Order – Conflict in GST Orders
Relevant Section(s): Sections 73 and 107 of the CGST Act, 2017
Judges: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Yashwant Varma and Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dharmesh Sharma

Facts of the Case [¶1-2]:

• Siemens Ltd. filed a writ petition against two assessment orders dated 27.04.2024 issued for the same tax period i.e., April 2018 to March 2019 by the same GST officer but with materially different outcomes.

• The two orders conflicted on crucial points: the first confirmed demands worth over ₹53 lakh, whereas the second dropped some of those very issues.

• The specific differences included tax demand on GSTR-1 vs GSTR-9, GSTR-1 vs E-Way bill, RCM ITC, and ITC on cancelled supplier GSTINs.

Questions in Consideration [¶3]:

• Can two contradictory orders be issued for the same tax period by the same officer?

• Whether such conflicting orders can co-exist legally?

• What is the valid course of action regarding the confirmed demand in one of the orders?

Observations of the Court [¶3-4]:

• The Court noted that dual and contradictory orders for the same period undermine the principles of natural justice and fair administration.

• It emphasized that while ITC denial due to supplier GSTIN cancellation can be appealed, other issues (e.g., tax differences in GSTR filings) must be governed by one consistent order (Ref: ZD070424062920H).

• The second order partially contradicted the first by dropping key demands, creating legal ambiguity and procedural impropriety.

Judgement of the Court [¶5]:

• The Court quashed the first order bearing reference no. ZD070424062889V (Annexure P1).

• It permitted the petitioner to pursue appellate remedies regarding the ITC denial issue.

• The second order (Ref: ZD070424062920H), being the later and more reasoned one, was allowed to govern the matter.

Between Fine Lines

• The Delhi High Court held that conflicting GST assessment orders for the same period are untenable.

• The Court quashed one of the two orders and allowed the taxpayer to challenge the ITC disallowance separately.

• The judgment reinforces the principle that assessment must be consistent and singular.

• Taxpayers can still approach the appellate authority for relief on sustained demands.

• Procedural propriety in issuing orders is essential for lawful administration under GST.

Summary of Referred Cases

Disclaimer – “The above summary is for academic purpose only; not formal legal opinion. Seek professional opinion before application. Author or publisher or website shall not be responsible for any usage in any form.”