2019 (10) TMI 612 - HC - GST

Arrest in response of summons - section 69 read with section 132(5) of the CGST Act - HELD THAT - Issue notice, returnable on 23.10.2019. By way of adinterim relief, the petitioner will appear before the second respondent in response to the summons dated 7.10.2019 (Annexure-A to the petition). He, however, shall not be arrested under section 69 read with section 132(5) of the CGST Act when he appears before the concerned authority.

Summary

Issues involved:
1. Apprehension of arrest under section 69 read with section 132(5) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (CGST Act) upon appearance before the second respondent authority in response to summons dated 7.10.2019.

Analysis:
The judgment delivered by Justice Harsha Devani addressed the petitioner's apprehension of being arrested under section 69 read with section 132(5) of the CGST Act upon appearing before the second respondent authority in response to the summons dated 7.10.2019. The petitioner, represented by Mr. Tushar P. Hemani, Senior Advocate, along with other learned advocates, submitted their readiness to appear before the concerned authority in compliance with the summons. However, they expressed concerns regarding the potential arrest during this process. In response to the submissions made by the petitioner's counsel, the court issued a notice returnable on 23.10.2019. As an ad interim relief measure, the court directed the petitioner to appear before the second respondent as per the summons but ensured that no arrest would be made under the specified sections of the CGST Act during this appearance. This directive aimed to provide temporary protection to the petitioner from any potential arrest while fulfilling the obligation to appear before the concerned authority. Additionally, the court allowed for direct service of the order to ensure prompt communication and compliance with the relief granted.

This judgment demonstrates the court's consideration of the petitioner's concerns regarding the possibility of arrest under specific sections of the CGST Act while complying with the summons issued by the second respondent authority. By issuing a notice returnable on a specified date and providing ad interim relief to prevent any arrest during the petitioner's appearance, the court balanced the interests of the petitioner and the requirements of the legal process. The directive for direct service further facilitated efficient communication and implementation of the relief granted. Overall, the judgment reflects a responsive and proactive approach by the court in addressing the apprehensions raised by the petitioner within the framework of the CGST Act.