2023 (6) TMI 52 - HC - GST

Refund / Return money deposited during investigation - petitioner claims that he was forced to make a deposit under threat and coercion - HELD THAT - It is seen that there is an inordinate delay on the part of the petitioner. The search was conducted on 16.02.2022 and the amount deposited, the refund of which the petitioner now claims, was made on 17.02.2022 - This Court is also unable to accept that the petitioner had retracted the statement by letters dated 12.04.2022 and 26.04.2022. The copy of a hand-written letter dated 12.04.2022 filed along with this petition indicates that it does not bear any acknowledgement. It is also significant to note that no letter dated 26.04.2022 is placed on record. Admittedly, the petitioner did not take any steps thereafter for one year. However, he sent a letter dated 12.04.2023, which was one year thereafter under legal advice - The petitioner is to respond to the said Show Cause Notice by 05.06.2023. However, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he would require an extension of further ten days. The Adjudicating Officer is requested to adjudicate the same as expeditiously as possible and preferably within a period of eight weeks from 15.06.2023 - petition disposed off.

Summary

Issues involved:
The issues involved in the judgment include challenging GST DRC-03, search conducted on premises, coercion during search operations, forced signing of documents, retraction of statements, delay in taking steps, denial of receipt of retraction letter, reference to previous case, and filing response to Show Cause Notice.

Challenging GST DRC-03:
The petitioner filed a petition seeking to set aside GST DRC-03 dated 17.02.2022 and requesting a refund of Rs. 1,15,00,000 along with statutory interest under CGST Act, 2017. The petitioner claimed that the search conducted at their premises was high-handed and they were coerced into making the deposit under threat. The petitioner also alleged that they were forced to sign certain documents during the search operations. However, the court noted an inordinate delay in the petitioner's actions and raised doubts about the retraction of statements made by the petitioner. The court directed the petitioner to respond to the Show Cause Notice by a specified date, with an extension granted upon request.

Search Conducted on Premises:
A search was conducted at the petitioner's premises on 16.02.2022, which the petitioner claimed was done in a high-handed manner. The petitioner alleged that they were forced to deposit Rs. 1,15,00,000 under coercion during the search. The petitioner further stated that they had retracted the statements made during the search on subsequent dates through letters. However, the court observed discrepancies in the submission of these retraction letters and questioned the authenticity of the claims made by the petitioner regarding coercion during the search.

Denial of Receipt of Retraction Letter:
The petitioner claimed to have sent retraction letters dated 12.04.2022 and 26.04.2022, retracting the statements made under coercion during the search operations. However, the court found discrepancies in the submission of these letters. The court noted that the letter dated 12.04.2022 did not bear any acknowledgment and no letter dated 26.04.2022 was placed on record. The respondents denied receiving any such retraction letter, raising doubts about the petitioner's claims.

Filing Response to Show Cause Notice:
The court directed the petitioner to respond to the Show Cause Notice by a specified date, with an extension of ten days granted upon the petitioner's request. The respondent did not object to this extension. The petitioner was instructed to file a response to the Show Cause Notice on or before 15.06.2023. The court requested the Adjudicating Officer to adjudicate the matter expeditiously, preferably within eight weeks from 15.06.2023. Ultimately, the petition was disposed of based on these terms.