Just a moment...

Report
FeedbackReport
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Feedback/Report an Error
Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
+ Post an Article
Post a New Article
Title :
0/200 char
Description :
Max 0 char
Category :
Co Author :

In case of Co-Author, You may provide Username as per TMI records

Delete Reply

Are you sure you want to delete your reply beginning with '' ?

Delete Issue

Are you sure you want to delete your Issue titled: '' ?

Articles

Back

All Articles

Advanced Search
Reset Filters
Search By:
Search by Text :
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms
Select Date:
FromTo
Category :
- 0 - Views

Limiting Judicial Intervention in relation to powers of arrest under Writ Jurisdiction

Date 31 Jul 2023
Written By
Supreme Court: Courts Shouldn't Interfere with Statutory Arrest Powers under GST Act via Writ Jurisdiction
The Supreme Court of India overturned a Gujarat High Court order, emphasizing that courts should generally not interfere with the statutory power of arrest under the GST Act through writ jurisdiction. This case involved a respondent summoned for tax evasion inquiries who sought protection from arrest through writ petitions. The Supreme Court ruled that conditions should not be imposed on the statutory power of arrest, referencing a precedent that such conditions could undermine statutory provisions. The respondent was granted an additional opportunity to present their statement to the authorities. - (AI Summary)

The Hon’ble Supreme Court in THE STATE OF GUJARAT ETC. VERSUS CHOODAMANI PARMESHWARAN IYER & ANR. ETC. - 2023 (7) TMI 1008 - SUPREME COURT set aside the order passed by the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court and held that power to arrest a person by an empowered authority under the GST Act may be termed as statutory in character and ordinarily the high courts should not interfere with exercise of such power under writ jurisdiction. 

Facts:

Choodamani Parmeshwaran Iyer (“the Respondent”) was issued multiple summons calling upon for interrogation in connection with an inquiry against M/s Iyer Enterprise Mundra Kutch in regard to the alleged evasion of tax under the provision of the Finance Act, 1994 (“the Finance Act”)and the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (“the CGST Act”).

Revenue Department (“the Appellant”) submitted that 14 summons have been issued to the Respondent but the Respondent appeared only for one such interrogation and contended that the inquiry was started five years ago but no proceedings could be initiated.

Thereafter, the Respondent filed two writs before the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court, as the Respondent was under apprehension of arrest, while passing an order dated December 24, 2018 (“the Impugned Order”) wherein the High Court place certain conditions on the Appellant with regard to interrogation.

Aggrieved with the Impugned Order the Appellant filed an appeal before the Hon’ble Supreme Court.

Issue:

Whether court vide writ petition can interfere with the statutory power of Revenue Authority by imposing conditions?

Held:

The Hon’ble Supreme Court in THE STATE OF GUJARAT ETC. VERSUS CHOODAMANI PARMESHWARAN IYER & ANR. ETC. - 2023 (7) TMI 1008 - SUPREME COURT held as under:

  • Observed that, if any person is summoned under Section 69 of the CGST Act for the purpose of recording of his statement, the provisions of Section 438 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1908 cannot be invoked.
  • Opined that, the power of officers under the CGST Act to arrest a person could be termed as statutory in character and a writ court should not ordinarily interfere with exercise of such power.
  • Relied upon the Judgement of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in UNION OF INDIA VERSUS PADAM NARAIN AGGARWAL ETC. - 2008 (10) TMI 1 - SUPREME COURT wherein the court observed that normally the court should not impose any condition before effecting arrest, if any conditions are imposed before effecting arrest for instance giving prior intimation to the person concerned etc., the statutory provisions would render ineffective and meaningless.
  • Held that, the Respondent shall be afforded an additional opportunity to present before the authority for the purpose of recording of their statements.

(Author can be reached at info@a2ztaxcorp.com)

0 answers
Sort by

Old Query - New Comments are closed.

Hide

No Replies are present for this Article

Recent Articles