M/S Aka Logistics Private LTD Thr Its General Manager Cum Authorized Signatory Shri Ashwani Agrawal vs. Union Of INDIA Through The Secretary Ministry Of Finance (Deptt Of Revenue)

Held

The Court held that the Additional Director General, Goods and Services Tax Intelligence, and the Deputy/Assistant Director, Goods and Services Tax Intelligence, do possess the jurisdiction to initiate proceedings and issue show cause notices under the GST Act, 2017. This is based on notifications issued by the Board under Section 5 of the Act, which empower these officers to act as Commissioners and Deputy Commissioners, respectively. The Court found the petitioners' argument regarding want of jurisdiction to be without substance. However, the Court also reiterated the settled legal position that while writ courts should generally not interfere at the show cause notice stage, they would intervene if a notice is issued without jurisdiction or in abuse of the process of law. Since the Court found jurisdiction to exist, it held that the petitioners are required to respond to the show cause notices for consideration by the concerned authorities. No specific amount in dispute was mentioned, and the procedural history focused on the issuance of show cause notices.

Facts

The petitioners, M/s AKA Logistics Private Limited, M/s Ambey Mining Pvt. Ltd., Gora Koley, Shourabh Agrawal, and Coal Mines Associated Traders Private Limited, filed writ petitions challenging show cause notices issued by GST authorities. The notices were issued by the Directorate General of GST Intelligence (DGGI) and were to be adjudicated by the Additional/Joint Commissioner (Adjudication) or Deputy/Assistant Commissioner (Adjudication). The petitioners contended that the officers issuing the notices and those adjudicating them lacked the necessary jurisdiction under the Goods and Services Tax (GST) Act, 2017, as they were not designated as Commissioners or Deputy Commissioners for the purpose of initiating proceedings. The DGGI, Jamshedpur, and the Additional/Joint Commissioner (Adjudication) in Kolkata and Ranchi were the authorities involved.

Key Issues

1. Whether the Additional Director General, Goods and Services Tax Intelligence, or Deputy/Assistant Director, Goods and Services Tax Intelligence, have the power to initiate proceedings under the GST Act, 2017, and consequently issue show cause notices, given their designations? (Question of law) Petitioner's contention: The petitioners argued that the officers issuing the show cause notices and those designated for adjudication lacked the requisite jurisdiction. They contended that the powers vested in the Additional Director General and Deputy/Assistant Director of GST Intelligence were not equivalent to those of a Commissioner or Deputy Commissioner, respectively, as required by the Act for initiating such proceedings. They relied on the principle that jurisdiction must be explicitly conferred. Revenue's contention: The respondents (Union of India and GST authorities) argued that notifications issued by the Board under Section 5 of the GST Act, 2017, empowered Additional Directors General and Deputy/Assistant Directors of GST Intelligence to act as Commissioners and Deputy Commissioners, respectively, thereby conferring jurisdiction to initiate proceedings and issue show cause notices.