Actions taken by the department during enquiry need not necessarily be termed as harassment

[CA Bimal Jain]

The Hon’ble Madras High Court in the matter of SRIDHAR VERSUS THE SUPERINTENDENT OF GST CUDDALORE [2022 (8) TMI 212 - MADRAS HIGH COURT] dismissed the petition alleging the harassment by the Superintendent of Goods and Services Tax.

Facts:
M/s Sridhar (“the Petitioner”) has filed an Criminal Petition under Section 482 of Code of Criminal procedure in order to direct the Superintendent of GST (“the Respondent”) not to harass him during the enquiry of the case. The Petitioner contented that he is forced to pay the tax of Rs.29 lakhs, whereas as per the Respondent, despite of several opportunity the Petitioner has not produced any documents to justify his case.

Issue:

• Whether the actions taken by the Respondent during the enquiry can be considered as harassment?

Held:

The Hon’ble Madras High Court in SRIDHAR VERSUS THE SUPERINTENDENT OF GST CUDDALORE [2022 (8) TMI 212 - MADRAS HIGH COURT]  held as under:

• Directed the Petitioner to corporate with the Respondent for enquiry.
• Stated that, the term harassment is so subjective which cannot be encapsulated in objective criterion.
• Held that, the Respondent shall issue notice for the appearance of the Petitioner for enquiry within two weeks and after enquiring the Petitioner, the Respondent may either register a complaint, if any cognizable offence is made out or close the complaint.

(Author can be reached at [email protected])