Dismissal of Writ Petition: Separate Inquiries Allowed Under U.P. GST Act

The court dismissed the writ petition, ruling that the initiation of separate inquiries by different authorities under Section 70 of the U.P. GST Act is permissible and does not contravene Section 6(2)(b) of the U.P. GST Act or CGST Act, as inquiries are distinct from formal proceedings on the same subject-matter.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Whether the initiation of an inquiry under Section 70 of the U.P. GST Act by one authority prohibits another authority from initiating a separate inquiry under the same Act or the CGST Act.
2. Interpretation of the terms "inquiry," "proceedings," and "subject-matter" under the U.P. GST Act and CGST Act.
3. Applicability of Section 6(2)(b) of the U.P. GST Act and CGST Act in prohibiting multiple proceedings on the same subject-matter.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Initiation of Inquiry under Section 70:
The petitioner argued that once an inquiry has been initiated by one authority under the U.P. GST Act, no other authority can initiate a separate inquiry under the same Act or the CGST Act. The petitioner cited the issuance of multiple summons by different authorities and contended that this was prohibited under Section 6(2)(b) of the U.P. GST Act. The respondent countered that Section 6(2)(b) prohibits proceedings, not inquiries, and that inquiries by different authorities are permissible as long as they are not on the same subject-matter.

2. Interpretation of Terms:
The court examined the terms "inquiry," "proceedings," and "subject-matter" as they are not defined in the U.P. GST Act or CGST Act. The court noted that the term "inquiry" in Section 70 is specific to summoning individuals to give evidence or produce documents. It is not synonymous with "proceedings," which refer to formal adjudication processes such as assessment, demand, and recovery. The court cited previous judgments to support its interpretation, emphasizing that "inquiry" is a distinct process aimed at gathering evidence.

3. Applicability of Section 6(2)(b):
The court analyzed Section 6(2)(b) of the U.P. GST Act and CGST Act, which prohibits the initiation of proceedings on the same subject-matter by different authorities. The court clarified that "subject-matter" refers to the same cause of action and dispute, and "proceedings" involve formal adjudication processes. The court concluded that Section 6(2)(b) does not apply to inquiries under Section 70, as inquiries are preliminary steps to gather evidence and do not constitute formal proceedings.

Findings and Conclusions:
The court concluded that:
1. The term "inquiry" under Section 70 has a specific purpose and is not synonymous with "proceedings" under Section 6(2)(b).
2. Section 6(2)(b) prohibits formal proceedings on the same subject-matter but does not prohibit separate inquiries by different authorities.
3. The facts of the case did not indicate any formal proceedings on the same subject-matter, only an inquiry under Section 70.

Judgment:
The court dismissed the writ petition, finding no merit in the petitioner's arguments. The court held that the initiation of an inquiry under Section 70 by different authorities is permissible and does not violate Section 6(2)(b) of the U.P. GST Act or CGST Act.

---