2024 (11) TMI 586 - HC - GST

Dismissal of application moved by the petitioner for summoning official of GST Department, Ludhiana along with record of GST 3B return - HELD THAT - Admittedly and evidently, the complaint filed by the respondent and pending before the learned trial Magistrate is at the stage of producing evidence of the respondent. No doubt, the petitioners have a right to cross-examine the respondent-complainant and the witnesses to be produced by her. Simultaneously, it is the right of the petitioners to confront the respondent-complainant or her witnesses with some document. However, that does not make the petitioners entitled to summon any witness at the stage when the respondent-complainant is availing her right to produce her own evidence. More so, as reflected, it was only some document in the form of GST 3B return which the petitioners want to be produced on record so that the same can be put to the respondent-complainant or the witnesses to be examined by her. Such a document can even otherwise be put to the respondent-complainant by the petitioners and not by way of summoning a witness from GST Department. The learned trial Magistrate after taking all these facts and circumstances into consideration and by passing a speaking and well-reasoned order, had dismissed the application moved by the petitioners and in view of the discussion as made above, there are no reason to come to any contrary conclusion. Accordingly, finding no merit, the petition is dismissed.

Summary

Issues:
1. Setting aside an order dismissing an application to summon an official from the GST Department and produce GST 3B return in a criminal complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.

Analysis:
The petitioners sought to set aside an order passed by the Court of Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Dhuri, dismissing their application to summon an official from the GST Department and produce the GST 3B return in a criminal complaint filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The complaint alleged dishonor of cheques issued by the petitioners in favor of the respondent-complainant. The petitioners moved the application during the stage of producing evidence by the respondent-complainant, aiming to confront the complainant with the GST 3B return. The learned Magistrate dismissed the application, stating that the petitioners could produce the record from the GST Department during their defense evidence stage, not during the respondent's evidence stage.

The petitioners contended that the impugned order lacked proper consideration and that summoning the GST Department official and producing the GST 3B return was crucial for a just decision. However, after hearing the petitioners' counsel and examining the record, the court opined that the petition did not merit allowance. The court emphasized that while the petitioners had the right to cross-examine the complainant and her witnesses and confront them with documents, this did not entitle them to summon a witness during the respondent's evidence stage. The court highlighted that the petitioners failed to produce the GST 3B return despite being asked to do so, and the argument regarding outstanding amounts could be addressed during the defense evidence stage.

The court upheld the trial Magistrate's decision, noting that the dismissal was based on a well-reasoned order considering all relevant facts and circumstances. The court found no merit in the petition and consequently dismissed it.