9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (10) TMI 1119X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... led by Private Limited Companies. W.P (C) Nos. 18692/2020, 18695/2020 and 18122/2020 are filed by partnership firms and W.P (C) No.18078/2020 filed by one K.T. Saidalavi, Managing Director/Managing Partner of the aforesaid entities. 2. The issue that arises for consideration is short. In all these cases the proper officer under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the CGST Act') had initiated enquiry regarding non-payment of GST and had directed the production of certain records. This was followed by summons issued under Section 70 of the CGST Act leading to the recording of certain statements. Certain records were also produced before the Central Authority. While matters stood thus the State Authority initiated proceedings under Section 74 read with Section 122 (1) of the CGST/SGST Acts. According to the petitioners in these cases the initiation of proceedings under Section 74 by the State Authority that culminated in order under that provision cannot be sustained in law in the light of the provisions contained in Section 6 of the CGST/SGST Acts. It is the case of the petitioners that a reading of the provisions contained in Section 6 of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... this contention. Lastly, it is submitted that there was no occasion to issue any proceedings under Section 74 of the CGST/SGST Acts and since proceedings were only on account of non-filing of returns, the proceedings should have been initiated under Section 62 of the CGST/SGST Acts. 4. The learned Senior Government Pleader vehemently opposes grant of any relief to the petitioners. It is submitted that on the strength of the decision of the Allahabad High Court in G.K Trading Company v. Union of India and others; 2020 SCC OnLine All 1907 as also the judgment of the Jharkhand High Court in Vivek Narsaria (supra) that the term 'initiation of proceedings' in Section 6 has to be construed as the commencement of the proceedings by the issuance of notice and any enquiry or summons issued in connection with the enquiry cannot be deemed to be commencement of the proceedings. 5. The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Central Tax Authority would also support the contention taken by the learned Senior Government Pleader and submits that the decision of the Allahabad High Court in G.K Trading Company (Supra) has squarely answered the issues raised by the petitioners against th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fficer appointed under this Act shall not lie before an officer appointed under the State Goods and Services Tax Act or the Union Territory Goods and Services Tax Act." 8. Sub-section (2) of Section 6 with which we are concerned, indicates that, where a proper officer under the CGST Act has issued an order under the provisions of the said Act, he shall also issue an order under the State Goods and Services Tax Act or the Union Territory Goods and Services Tax Act as the case may be under the intimation to the jurisdictional officer of the State Tax or the Union Territory Tax Authority as the case may be. The Section further provides that where a proper officer under the State Goods and Services Tax Act or the Union Territory Goods and Services Tax Act has initiated any proceedings on a subject matter, no proceedings shall be initiated by the proper officer under the CGST Act on the same subject matter. 9. On a reading of the provisions, unaided by the authority, I am unable to conclude that the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners must be accepted. The term 'initiation of any proceedings' is no doubt a reference to the issuance of a notice under the prov ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... under Section 70 is not a proceeding referable to Section 6 (2) (b) of the Act." 10. The judgment of the Patna High Court in Baibhaw Construction (supra) on which considerable reliance was placed by the learned counsel for the petitioners do not appear to have considered the question as to whether the term 'initiation of proceedings' in Section 6 (2) (b) of the CGST/SGST Acts would include any notice issued for any enquiry or any summons issued for the purposes of completing such enquiry either by the Central Authority or by the State Authority. Therefore I am of the view that the judgment of the Patna High Court in Baibhaw Construction (supra) does not come to the aid of the petitioners. The judgment of the Gujarat High Court in Vipulchandra Purusottamdas Mahant (supra) dealt with a different factual situation where that court appears to have directed that in view of the fact that the 4th respondent in that case had already initiated proceedings in respect of 5 different firms including the firm in respect of which summons had been issued to the petitioner by another authority directed that the proceeding be continued and concluded by respondent No.4 in that case. A read ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
