9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (2) TMI 436X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng. 2. Present writ petition has been filed challenging the constitutional validity of certain provisions of the Central Goods and Services Tax, Act, 2017. 3. This Court in a similar matter in Dhruv Krishan Maggu vs. Union of India & Ors., W.P.(C) 5454/2020 has refused to pass any interim order holding that it is not inclined to interfere with the investigation at this stage and that too in writ proceedings. The relevant observations made by this Court in Dhruv Krishan Maggu vs. Union of India & Ors. (supra) are reproduced hereinbelow:- (i) There is always a presumption in favour of constitutionality of an enactment or any part thereof and the burden to show that there has been a clear transgression of constitutional principles is upon ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is caused to the petitioners as they are not able to avail protection under Article 20(3) of the Constitution and/or the provisions of Cr. P.C. do not apply even when CGST Act is silent, are untenable in law. (vii) Reliance on "no coercive orders" by counsel for the petitioners are untenable as the Supreme Court in Union of India vs. Sapna Jain & Ors., SLP (Crl.) 4322-4324/2019 dated 29th May, 2019 has 'spoken its mind'. (viii)This Court prima facie finds force in the submissions of the learned ASG that the Central Tax Officers are empowered to conduct intelligence-based enforcement action against taxpayers assigned to State Tax Administration under Section 6 of the CGST Act. (ix) What emerges at the prima facie stage is that it is t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 03 of 2018 has transferred the reference made to a larger Bench of this Court to itself. Consequently, as there are two contrary Division Bench judgments, it cannot be said that the order passed by this Court in Dhruv Krishan Maggu vs. Union of India & Ors. (supra) is per incuriam. 7. Further, the interim order passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana in Akhil Krishan Maggu & Anr. vs. Deputy Director, DGGI & Ors. (supra) is not binding on this Court. Also as the Supreme Court in Supreme Court in Union of India vs. Sapna Jain & Ors., SLP (Crl.) 43224324/2019 has endorsed the Telangana High Court view, it cannot be urged that this Court committed an error in law in not following the High Court of Punjab and Haryana view. 8. Accordingl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
