The Aurangabad Bench of the Bombay High Court stated that summons issued u/s 70 of the Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST) Act are intended for questioning and taking statements, and do not constitute detention.
The Court stated that there is no need for a 7-day notice before issuing a summons, as per the section, which provides authority to GST officers to summon anyone if it is necessary to obtain details or documents in an inquiry.
Last week, the division bench of Justices YG Khobragade and Sandipkumar C More made the ruling while dismissing a writ petition filed by Kanhaiya Nilambar Jha, who asked for a ₹10 lakh compensation, alleging illegal detention by GST officers in reference to a bogus ITC probe.
When the legal section does not specify a requirement for a seven-day notice, it cannot be deemed mandatory, the court stated. It clarified that a person may be summoned for inquiry and the recording of statements without this being considered detention.
Jha, GST officers took him from Mumbai to Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar (formerly Aurangabad) on June 17, 2025, without issuing any summons or arrest memo, and formally arrested him only on June 21 concerning alleged tax fraud. He accused the authorities of breaching his constitutional rights.
Read Also: How GST Software Keeps Your Financial Data Safe
Citing recent Supreme Court observations that uphold the constitutional validity of arrests under the GST law and the authority to issue summons, the bench emphasised that investigative authorities should be authorised to conduct inquiries as per the law while ensuring safeguards against misuse. Seeing no evidence of illegal detention, the court denied the compensation appeal and dismissed the petition.
As per the order, Jha was kept at GST Bhavan in Aurangabad, which was his own choice, and was allowed to use his four mobile handsets. The revenue authorities specified that Jha was summoned as a witness at the time of an anti-evasion inquiry and that he attended questioning voluntarily between June 17 and June 20. He was arrested only after charges were confirmed.
Read Also: SC Upholds GST Act’s Arrest and Summons Powers, Affirming Parliament’s Legislative Authority
The order of the HC said that the GST summons jurisprudence. The ruling furnishes a dual message that authorities may act firmly within statutory limits, and the taxpayers should object and keep appropriate records in the investigation.
| Case Title | Kanhaiya Nilambar Jha vs. Union of India |
| Case No. | Criminal Writ Petition No. 885 OF 2025 |
| Counsel for the Petitioner | Mr R.F. Totala, and Mr Vedant Kabra |
| Counsel for the Respondent | Mr A.G. Talhar, Mr Pratik Bothari and Ms Nandini Chittal |
| Bombay High Court | Read Order |
