TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (10) TMI 414
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d both are on the board today and in view of that, both the petitions have been heard together with consent of the parties. 2. Heard Mrs. Shilpi Sandil Gadodia, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. P.A.S. Pati, learned counsel for opposite party no.2. Nobody appears on behalf of the State. 3. In Cr.M.P. No.2454 of 2019, the Director of M/s. SSK Devcon Private Limited, namely, Satyendra Singh Kushwah is the petitioner and in Cr.M.P. No.2449 of 2019, the said company is the petitioner. 4. In both the petitions, the prayer is made for quashing the entire criminal proceedings arising out of Complaint Case No.1880 of 2019, dated 15.04.2019 including the order taking cognizance dated 19.06.2019, whereby, the learned Court has been pleas....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....id summons have not been mentioned in the complaint petition. She submits that the petitioner-company is engaged in providing services for transportation of coal and with the advent of the GST regime, the petitioner obtained registration in respect of its business carried out in the State of Jharkhand. She also submits that for the services provided by the petitioner-company, it raised bills for payment to its clients and the said clients being service recipients were delaying in releasing payment to the petitioner-company. She submits that the GST amount to the tune of Rs.5,60,52,391/- has been paid in three installments. She submits that the GST is a complete Code in itself and there are provisions of penalty and in view of that, Section ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n the Director, namely, Satyendra Singh Kushwah of the said company has been made accused by way of filing amendment petition before the learned court which was allowed and there is no averment with regard to the involvement of Satyendra Singh Kushwah, who happened to be the Director of the said company. She further submits that the statute is not providing any vicarious liability that cannot be imposed. She submits that the deposition of the GST amount is accepted by the authority concerned. On these grounds, she submits that the cognizance under Section 174 of the Indian Penal Code is bad in law. 7. On the other hand, Mr. P.A.S. Pati, learned counsel for opposite party no.2 submits that the petitioner has failed to comply with summons wi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... application mainly on the ground that no cognizance was taken of the complaint before the disposal of amendment application. Firstly, the Magistrate was yet to apply the judicial mind to the contents of the complaint and had not taken cognizance of the matter. Secondly, since summons was yet to be ordered to be issued to the accused, no prejudice would be caused to the accused. Thirdly, the amendment did not change the original nature of the complaint being one for defamation. Fourthly, the publication of poem Khalnayakaru being in the nature of subsequent event created a new cause of action in favour of the respondent which could have been prosecuted by the respondent by filing a separate complaint and therefore, to avoid multiplicity of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....in Annexure-4, the authority allowed time and directed to make full payment of GST amount. The sum of Rs.50 Lakhs and Rs.1 Crore were deposited on 14.01.2019 and 16.01.2019 respectively, which was informed to the authority concerned vide letter dated 17.01.2019 and further four weeks' time was requested to deposit further amount and finally on 08.02.2019, total sum of Rs.5,60,52,391/- inclusive of the earlier payments have been made to the authority concerned. Thus, it is crystal clear that so far as the amount of GST is concerned, that has already been deposited. However in the counter affidavit, it has been stated that sum of Rs.5,21,95,792/- has been received by the authority concerned subject to verification. However, non-filing of ....