The Rajasthan High Court, Jaipur Bench, ruled that issuance of summons is not initiation of proceedings referable to under Section 6(2)(b) of the CGST Act.
The bench of Justice Pankaj Bhandari and Justice Shubha Mehta noted that the extent of Section 6(2)(b) and Section 70 of the CGST Act is different and distinct, since the former deals with any proceedings on the subject matter, while the latter deals with the authority to furnishes a summons in an inquiry, and hence, the words “proceedings” and “inquiry” could not be mixed up to read since if there is a bar for the respondents to invoke the power under Section 70 of the CGST Act.
The applicant has contested the issuance of summons under Section 70 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 passed through the Superintendent/Appraiser/Senior Intelligence Officer DGGI, and is praying for quashing and setting aside it.
The applicant argued that the state heads had started the proceedings and under Section 6(2)(b) of the CGST Act, if the proper officer under the State Goods and Services Tax Act or Union Territory Goods and Services Tax Act has started any proceedings on a subject matter then no proceedings will be initiated via the proper officer under this Act on the same subject case.
As the state authorities had started action, summons under Section 70 of the CGST Act cannot have been issued via the DGGI. Under Section 2(91) of the CGST Act, a proper officer has been designated.
The Writ Petition is not maintainable and summons given under Section 70 of the CGST Act. cannot be stated to be the initiation of proceedings, counsel argued. The applicant had started a bogus crime, and on the fake and forged documents, he asserted that ITC limits and summons were issued under Section 70 of the CGST Act by the DGGI, and the bar under Section 6(2)(b) of the CGST Act doesn’t applicable. The Union of India is authorized to initiate the proceedings when there is interstate evasion of tax or a claim of tax advantage.
As per court issuance of summons under Section 70 of the CGST Act is not covered by Section 6(2)(b) of the CGST Act, and the present Civil Writ petition, being devoid of merits, is therefore dismissed.
| Case Title | Rais Khan Versus Add. Commissioner |
| Case No. | D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3087/2024 |
| Date | 14.03.2024 |
| Counsel For Petitioner: | Prabhansh Sharma |
| Counsel For Respondent: | Bharat Vyas |
| Rajasthan High Court | Read Order |
