9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (3) TMI 627X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... R. JUSTICE MADAN GOPAL VYAS For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vikas Balia, Sr. Adv. assisted by Mr. D.P.S. Charan Mr. Vikram Choudhary, Sr. Adv. assisted by Mr. Mr. Vinay Kothari, through V.C. Mr. Sharad Kothari, Mr. Amit Desai, Sr. Adv. assisted by Mr. Rishabh Sancheti, through V.C. Mr. Rishi Sehgal, Mr. Lalit Pareek, Mr. Priyanshu Arora, Mr. Aditya Gupta For Respondent(s): Mr. Rajvendra Saraswat, Mr. Mukesh Rajpurohit, ASG with Mr. Kinshuk Jain Mr. Naneet Singh Bikh, through V.C. Order Heard on stay applications for interim relief filed by the petitioners namely, Prakash Chandra Purohit in Civil Writ Petition No.2750/2022 and petitioner namely, M.L. Paliwal in Civil Writ Petition No.2751/2022. Learned senior counsel appearing for the petitione ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... endered by the Supreme Court and High Courts are cited at the Bar by learned counsel for the petitioners to impress upon this Court that in the absence of any prima facie material even requiring issuance of summons and the manner in which the respondent authorities are engaged in wild goose chase, the petitioners may be protected against any arrest till these petitions are decided by the Court, otherwise the purpose of filing these petitions would be frustrated. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the respondents would argue that the petitions are based on apprehension which has no basis. They would submit that the petitioners have rushed to the Court at this stage when only summons under Section 70 of the CGST Act have been i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ut released after recording their statements. On prima facie considerations, we find that these petitions have been filed by the petitioners at the initial stage when summons have been issued to them to appear before the respondent authorities in the course of investigation being carried out pursuant to searches carried out in various business establishments in the matter of alleged huge GST evasion. At this stage, after hearing learned counsel for the parties and various judgments cited at the Bar, it cannot be said that the respondent authorities had no jurisdiction or authority under the law to issue summons under Section 70 of the CGST Act. The summons have been issued to the petitioners in the two petitions in the course of investigat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... any other person including the petitioners, does not appeal to us. Another submission that proceeding under Section 70 of the CGST Act could be initiated only after a final assessment is carried out, is also, on prima facie considerations, not borne out from the statutory scheme of the CGST Act. On prima facie considerations, we do not find that the issuance of summons to petitioners is without jurisdiction and authority of law. The action initiated by the respondents does not appear to be actuated by any mala fide intention and further taking into consideration the material disclosed during various searches and raids conducted by the respondent authorities involving M/s MPPL and M/s. MPSPL, we are not inclined to pass any interim order i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
