2026:HHC:13507 THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA CWP No.2696 of 2024 Decided on: 24.04.2026 ____________________________________________________ Abbott Healthcare Pvt Ltd ....Petitioner Versus Union of India & Ors. …Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Vivek Singh Thakur, Judge Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ranjan Sharma, Judge Whether approved for reporting? For the petitioner: Mr.Bharat Raichandani and Mr. Ishan Kashyap, Advocate, for the petitioner. For the respondents : Mr. Nand Lal Thakur, Senior Panel counsel, for respondents No.1 & 3. Mr.Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Sushant Keprate, Additional Advocate General, for respondent No.2-State. Mr. Vijay K. Arora, Senior Advocate with Mr. Hitansh Raj and Mr. Gaurav Kumar, Advocates, for respondents No.4 to 6. Vivek Singh Thakur, Judge (oral) This petition has been preferred against the impugned order dated 29.12.2023 passed by respondent No.4, i.e. Additional Commissioner, Central Goods & Services Tax, Shimla, H.P - 2 - 2. On 22.05.2025, following order was passed by this Court in this matter:- “Learned counsel for the petitioner on instructions states that the petitioner is mainly agitating the findings recorded by the Additional Commissioner, regarding wrong availment of ITC amounting to Rs.17,67,81,453/- on invoices issued by the ISD during 2018-19 and 2019-20. A perusal of the order goes to show that adjudicating authority has specifically held in para 4.6.12 of its finding that a credit of Rs.17,67,81,453/- has been wrongly distributed by the ISD to the Noticee as such is recoverable from the Noticee in terms of the provisions of CGST Act, 2017 and HPGST Act, 2017 read with Section 20 of the IGST Act, 2017. In furtherance to his submissions, today learned counsel for the petitioner has placed before us a copy of the Audit Report under Section 65(6) of the CGST Act, wherein, a clean chit has been given to the petitioner with regard to the aforesaid amount. Confronted with this, learned counsel for the respondents pray for and are granted time to seek instructions. List on 05.06.2025.” 3. Till date, respondents have not placed any material on record to rebut the aforesaid plea. Impact of Audit Report being relied upon by the petitioner is required to be adjudicated by the concerned Authority. 4. In view of the above, impugned order dated 29.12.2023 is set aside with a direction to the Additional Commissioner, Central Goods & Services Tax, Shimla, H.P., to decide the matter afresh by taking into - 3 - consideration the submissions made and material placed on record on behalf of the appellant as well as the Revenue Department. 5. Needful be done within two months. 6. Necessary exercise by the concerned officer(s) be completed as expeditiously as possible, preferably within two months from today. 7. Needless to say, we have not adjudicated any issue on merit including the merits of the show cause notice as well as objections raised by petitioner. Concerned Authority shall adjudicate the matter afresh without being influenced by this order or any other observations made by this Court. Accordingly, petition stands disposed of being infructuous along with pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. (Vivek Singh Thakur) Judge (Ranjan Sharma) Judge April 24, 2026 (meera)