Suraj Choudhury vs. Superintendent, Anti Evasion Dept.
Held
The Court considered the facts presented and the report filed by the respondents. Based on the information that the petitioner's conduct was not clean, his claimed business was bogus, and his Input Tax Credit claims were also bogus, as indicated by the preliminary investigation, the Court was not inclined to entertain the writ petition. Therefore, the Court dismissed the writ petition. The specific provisions of law or precedents relied upon by either side are not explicitly detailed in the judgment, nor is the specific amount in dispute.
Facts
The petitioner, Suraj Choudhury, challenged an order of provisional attachment of his bank account. The respondents, represented by the Superintendent, Hdqrs. Anti-Evasion Unit (GR.D) Howrah CGST & CX, submitted a report indicating that the petitioner's conduct was not clean, his claimed business was bogus, and his claims for Input Tax Credit were also bogus, as revealed by a preliminary investigation. This report was filed on November 30, 2021. The High Court considered these facts and the contents of the report.
Key Issues
1. Whether the provisional attachment of the petitioner's bank account is justified based on the preliminary investigation findings. (Question of fact and law). The petitioner argued that the attachment was unjustified. The respondents argued that the petitioner's conduct and business were bogus, and his Input Tax Credit claims were also bogus, based on preliminary investigation by the department's investigating wing.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
2021. p.b. Sl. No.
W.P.A. 4157 of 2021 (Through Video Conference) Suraj Choudhury Vs. The Superintendent & Ors. Ms. Amrita Pandey, Ms. Monideepta Banerjee. ……….for the petitioner. Mr. B. P. Banerjee, Mr. Tapan Bhanja. ………for the respondents. In this matter, petitioner has challenged the impugned order of provisional attachment of bank account of the petitioner in question. Mr. Banerjee, learned advocate appearing for the respondents files instruction/report received from the respondents authority being Superintendent, Hdqrs. Anti- Evasion Unit (GR.D) Howrah CGST & CX from which it appears that the conduct of the petitioner is not clean and the business he claims to carry is all bogus and petitioner claims for Input Tax Credit is bogus which has appeared by preliminary investigation by the investigating wing of the department. Let such instruction dated 30th November, 2021 filed by Mr. Banerjee be kept with the record. Considering the facts as discussed above and taking into consideration, the contents of the said instruction/
2 report dated 30th November, 2021, I am not inclined to entertain this writ petition and accordingly this writ
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the Calcutta High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.