2023 (7) TMI 815 - HC - GST

Validity of preliminary reports issued by the Deputy Commissioner of Revenue, Bureau of Investigation/respondent no. 1 - preliminary reports challenged on the alleged ground that the said officer/respondent no. 1 does not have any jurisdiction to ask the petitioners to file any objection to the aforesaid preliminary reports or asking the petitioners to avail the opportunity of personal hearing - HELD THAT - Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as appears from record and submission of the parties, it is found that what the petitioners have challenged in these writ petitions are a mere preliminary reports on the basis of investigation which is at preliminary stage and that the petitioners have been given several opportunities to file objection to the same, if they have got any, against the said preliminary reports and also several opportunities of personal hearing have been provided to the petitioners which they voluntarily did not avail and that the petitioners have not annexed to the writ petitions any of the objections or response which they have filed from time to time and that the judgment of the Hon ble supreme Court in the case of Canon India Private Limited 2021 (3) TMI 384 - SUPREME COURT relied upon by the petitioners is under a different Act and is distinguishable both on facts and law. There are no reason to interfere with the aforesaid impugned preliminary reports at this stage of investigation by which it has sought objection from the petitioners if they have any and accordingly these writ petitions being premature are dismissed.

Summary

Issues:
The jurisdiction of the Deputy Commissioner of Revenue to seek objections and conduct personal hearings based on preliminary reports.

Summary:
The petitioners challenged preliminary reports issued by the Deputy Commissioner of Revenue, Bureau of Investigation, alleging lack of jurisdiction to request objections or personal hearings. The petitioners were visited by officials who requested business documents, and further notices were issued for document production. The petitioners raised concerns of natural justice violation, which were addressed by the respondent. The Special Commissioner of Revenue responded to a recusal request by the petitioners. The Additional Government Pleader argued that the exercise was at a preliminary stage, seeking objections based on investigations, with no demand for payment. The authority's actions were deemed in line with the Act, Rules, and Orders, empowering officers for inspection and investigation. Orders delegated powers to officers for investigation under territorial jurisdiction. The respondent was yet to act as an adjudicating authority under relevant provisions. The Supreme Court judgment cited by the petitioners was deemed inapplicable to the case.

The court found that the challenges were against preliminary reports at an early stage of investigation. The petitioners were given opportunities to respond and attend personal hearings, which they did not avail. The absence of filed objections or responses by the petitioners was noted. The cited Supreme Court judgment was deemed irrelevant. The court declined to interfere with the preliminary reports, dismissing the writ petitions as premature.