Issuance Of Summons Is Not Initiation Of Proceedings Referable To Under Section 6(2)(B) Of CGST Act: Rajasthan High Court

The Rajasthan High Court, Jaipur Bench, has held that issuance of summons is not initiation of proceedings referable to under Section 6(2)(b) of the CGST Act.

The bench of Justice Pankaj Bhandari and Justice Shubha Mehta has observed that the scope of Section 6(2)(b) and Section 70 of the CGST Act is different and distinct, as the former deals with any proceedings on subject matter, whereas the latter deals with the power to issue a summons in an inquiry, and therefore, the words “proceedings” and “inquiry” cannot be mixed up to read as if there is a bar for the respondents to invoke the power under Section 70 of the CGST Act.

The petitioner/assessee has challenged the issuance of summons under Section 70 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 passed by Superintendent/Appraiser/Senior Intelligence Officer DGGI, and is praying for quashing and setting aside of the same.

The petitioner contended that state authorities had initiated the proceedings, and as per Section 6(2)(b) of the CGST Act, if a proper officer under the State Goods and Services Tax Act or 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 this Act on the same subject matter. Since the state authorities had initiated action, summons under Section 70 of the CGST Act could not have been issued by the DGGI. A proper officer has been defined under Section 2(91) of the CGST Act.

The department contended that the Writ Petition is not maintainable and summons given under Section 70 of the CGST Act cannot be said to be the initiation of proceedings. The petitioner had committed a bogus crime, and on fake and forged documents, he was claiming input tax credit limits and summons were issued under Section 70 of the CGST Act by the DGGI, and the bar under Section 6(2)(b) of the CGST Act would not apply. When there is interstate evasion of tax or a claim of tax benefit, the Union of India is authorized to initiate the proceedings.

The court held that issuance of summons under Section 70 of the CGST Act is not covered by Section 6(2)(b) of the CGST Act, and the present Civil Writ petition, being devoid of merits, is accordingly dismissed.

Counsel For Petitioner: Prabhansh Sharma

Counsel For Respondent: Bharat Vyas

Case Title: Rais Khan Versus Add. Commissioner

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Raj) 75

Case No.: D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3087/2024

Click Here To Read The Order