2023 (9) TMI 557 - HC - GST

Validity of summons issued during investigation proceedings - Seeking desealing of the premises in question to enable the petitioner to run the business - HELD THAT - The petitioner is duty bound to cooperate in the proceedings for investigation and no case is made out for quashing of the summons. That apart, seeing as the petitioner has not appeared pursuant to summons dated 31.05.2023 to either tender information or to cooperate in the continuing investigation, this Court is unable to quash the summons, which has been issued directing appearance of the petitioner. In any event, the summons required the petitioner to appear on 27.05.2023 and has hence does not survive as on date. In order to facilitate both the process of desealing of the premises as well as continuance of the investigation, let the petitioner appear before R3 on 28.06.2023 at 10.30 a.m. without expecting any further notice in this regard along with a written request for desealing of the premises in question and all materials in support of its contentions. Petition dismissed.

Summary

Issues:
The issues involved in the judgment are related to the quashing of summons, desealing of premises, cooperation in investigation, and protection of interests under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.

Quashing of Summons:
The petitioner, a registered dealer under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, sought to quash the summons issued by the respondent officer for appearing in the investigation. The court noted that the petitioner failed to appear pursuant to the summons dated 31.05.2023, which had directed the appearance of the petitioner on 27.05.2023. As a result, the court found no grounds to quash the summons.

Desealing of Premises:
The petitioner requested desealing of the business premises to continue operations. The court directed the petitioner to appear before the respondent officer on 28.06.2023 without further notice, along with a written request for desealing and supporting materials. The respondent officer was instructed to consider the request, ensuring the revenue's interests are protected as per the Act and Rules, and pass orders accordingly.

Cooperation in Investigation:
The court emphasized the petitioner's duty to cooperate in the investigation process. It was noted that the petitioner had not appeared before the respondents or their authorized representative, leading to the continued sealing of the premises. The court highlighted the importance of cooperation in the proceedings for a fair investigation.

Protection of Interests:
Acknowledging the petitioner's claim that necessary documents were inside the sealed premises, the court outlined a process for desealing the premises, procuring the required documents in the presence of the respondent officer, and resealing the premises to protect the interests of both parties. The court emphasized the need to safeguard the interests of both the petitioner and the revenue.

Conclusion:
Ultimately, the Writ Petition seeking quash of the summons and desealing of the premises was dismissed by the court, with no costs imposed. The court's decision aimed to balance the need for cooperation in the investigation process, protection of interests, and adherence to legal procedures under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.