M/S Kgr And Company vs. Union Of INDIA

CW/3625/2021HC RajasthanGSTCNR RJHC02021367202128 April 2025Bench: INDERJEET SINGH,MUKESH RAJPUROHIT3 pages

AI SummaryDismissed

Facts

M/s Kgr And Company, through its proprietor Sunil Jadhav, filed a writ petition before the Rajasthan High Court, Bench at Jaipur. The petitioner challenged multiple summons and an advisory issued by Superintendents (Anti Evasion) of CGST and Central Excise State Tax. The petitioner alleged abuse of authority, harassment, and infringement of fundamental rights under Articles 14, 19(1)(g), and 21 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner sought to quash the summons and advisory, and for directions against the respondents. The respondents, represented by Mr. Kinshuk Jain, Senior Standing Counsel for CBIC, argued that the writ petition was premature as it was filed solely against the issuance of summons.

Held

The Court dismissed the writ petition. The Court found that the writ petition was filed solely against the issuance of summons. The Court noted that on multiple previous occasions, the counsel for the petitioner had failed to appear before the Court to argue the matter. Based on the fact that the petition was only against the issuance of summons, the Court concluded that no case was made out for interference. Therefore, the Court held that the petitioner had not established grounds for the High Court to intervene at this stage. The Court did not delve into the merits of the petitioner's allegations regarding abuse of authority, infringement of fundamental rights, or the validity of the summons and advisory, deeming the petition premature.

Key Issues

1. Whether the invocation of powers under Section 70 of the CGST Act by respondents No. 2 & 3, through the issuance of summons and an advisory, constituted an abuse of authority and harassment, in contravention of DGGI circular dated 14.08.2020? The petitioner argued that the respondents had abused their authority, harassed the assessee, and acted in contravention of the DGGI circular. The petitioner also contended that simultaneous invocation of jurisdiction by officers of the same rank from the same Commissionerate on the same subject matter amounted to abuse of authority. 2. Whether the repetitive issuance of summons, compelling personal appearance and submission of information already available with the authorities, infringed the petitioner's fundamental rights under Article 14 & 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India? The petitioner argued that such actions were oppressive and violated their right to practice their trade. 3. Whether the mere mention of 'GST investigation' in summons under Section 70 of the CGST Act constituted adequate compliance with the principles of natural justice? The petitioner argued it was inadequate. 4. Whether treating the assessee as a defaulter and holding them liable for tax without an adjudication order was illegal? The petitioner argued it was per se illegal. 5. Whether the actions of respondents No. 2 & 3 amounted to 'tax-terrorism' infringing the petitioner's fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution of India? The petitioner alleged grave trauma and mental agony. The respondents argued that the writ petition was premature as it was filed only against the issuance of summons.

Sections Cited

Section 70

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

[2025:RJ-JP:17844-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3625/2021 M/s Kgr And Company, Shop No. 204, Agrasen Market Ke Piche, Mehandi Ka Chowk, Johari Bazar, Jaipur, Through Its Proprietor Sunil Jadhav S/o Shri Mahadev Jadhav, Aged About 45 Years, R/o 12, Ekta Vihar, Govind Nagar- West, Jaipur 302002 ----Petitioner Versus 1. Union Of India, Through Chief Commissioner, Central Goods And Services Tax, (Jaipur Zone), New Central Revenue Building, Statue Circle, C Scheme, Jaipur 302005. 2. Superintendent (Anti Evasion), Cgst And Central Excise State Tax (Gst), Room No, 1.32 Anti-Evasion, Cgst Commissionerate, New Central Revenue Building, Statue Circle, C Scheme, Jaipur 302005 3. Superintendent (Anti Evasion), Cgst And Central Excise State Tax (Gst), First Floor, Anti - Evasion, New Central Revenue Building, Statue Circle, C Scheme, Jaipur 302005 ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : None. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Kinshuk Jain, Senior Standing Counsel for CBIC. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJEET SINGH HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MUKESH RAJPUROHIT

Order 28/04/2025 None present on behalf of the petitioner even in the second round. This appeal has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayer:-

[2025:RJ-JP:17844-DB] (2 of 3) [CW-3625/2021] “It is, therefore, humbly prayed that the Writ Petition may kindly be allowed and by an appropriate order or direction- (1) It may be held and declared and respondent No.2 & 3 have abused their authority by recklessly invoking powers under Section 70 as a means of harassment and oppression, in direct contravention of DGGI circular dated 14.08.2020 (Annexure-10). (2) It may be held and declared simultaneous invocation of juri iction by to officers of the same rank and position from the same Commissionerate on a seemingly same subject matter amounts to abuse of authority with the intent of harassing the assessee; (3) It may be held and declared that repetitive issuance of summons forcing the assessee to appear personally for tendering statements and providing documents/information, which information is otherwise available with Respondent

authorities,

amounts

to infringement of petitioner’s fundamental rights enshrined under Article 14 & 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India; (4) It may be declared that mere mentioning of nature of inquiry as ‘GST investigation’ in summons issued under Section 70 of the CGST Act is inadequte compliance of the principles of natural justice; (5) It may be declared that treating the assessee as defaulter and holding him liable to pay tax in the absence of passing of any order of adjudication is per-se illegal; (6) It may be declared that Respondent No. 2 & 3 have unleashed tax-terrorism on the Petitioner causing grave trauma and mental agony,

thereby

infringing

petitioner’s fundamental right enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution of India; (7) Summons dated 25.02.2021 (Annexure 4) as well as 08.03.2021 (Annexure-9) issued by Respondent No.2 may be quashed; (8) Advisory dated 01.03.2021 (Annexure-8) issued by Respondent No.3 may be quashed; (9) The Respondent No. 1 may be directed to issue suitable directions against Respondent No. 3 regarding invocation powers under Section 70 of the CGST/SGST Act; (10) Any other order or direction which this Hon’ble Court deems just and proper may kindly be passed.”

[2025:RJ-JP:17844-DB] (3 of 3) [CW-3625/2021] Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents submits that the writ petition filed by the petitioner is premature as the same has been filed only against the issuance of summons to the petitioner. Heard counsel for the respondents and perused the material available on record. We have gone through the record and find that on many previous occasions counsel for the petitioner failed to appear before this court to argue the matter. Since, the writ petition has been filed only against the issuance of summons, therefore, in our considered view, no case is made out for interference by this Court. In that view of the matter, this writ petition is dismissed. (MUKESH RAJPUROHIT),J (INDERJEET SINGH),J MG/62

Reproduced from the public record of the Rajasthan High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.