2023 (5) TMI 922 - HC - GST

Presence of Advocate during investigation proceedings - Seeking direction to Respondents their subordinates, servants and agents to forthwith permit recording of voluntary statements of the Petitioner under Section 70 of the Maharashtra Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 under the presence of Advocate at visible but not audible distance during interrogation - HELD THAT - Considering the aforesaid and having regard to the orders annexed to the petition from Exhibit-E to Exhibit-L , we allow the petition and as such, permit the petitioner s Advocate to remain present at the time of recording of the petitioner s statement at a visible, but not at an audible distance. We also permit videography of the said petitioner s statement, at the cost of the petitioner. A copy of the said videography shall be handed over to the petitioner after show cause notice is issued to the petitioner. Petition allowed.

Summary

Issues involved:
The issue involved in this case is the petitioner's prayer for the presence of an Advocate during the recording of their statement u/s 70 of the Maharashtra Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 and the permission for videography of the statement at the petitioner's cost.

Presence of Advocate during statement recording:
The petitioner prayed for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writs, orders, or directions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, directing the respondents to permit the recording of voluntary statements of the petitioner u/s 70 of the Act in the presence of an Advocate at a visible but not audible distance. The petitioner relied on past orders allowing such presence and videography. The respondent No.2 had no objection to the presence of the Advocate at a visible distance during the recording, as well as to the videography of the statement at the petitioner's cost. The Court allowed the petition, permitting the petitioner's Advocate to be present at a visible but not audible distance during the recording of the statement and allowed videography at the petitioner's expense. A copy of the videography was to be provided to the petitioner after a show cause notice was issued.

Conclusion:
The High Court of Bombay allowed the petition and disposed of the matter by permitting the presence of the petitioner's Advocate at a visible but not audible distance during the recording of the petitioner's statement u/s 70 of the Maharashtra Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017. The Court also allowed videography of the statement at the petitioner's cost, with a copy to be provided to the petitioner after the issuance of a show cause notice. The order was to be acted upon by all concerned based on an authenticated copy.