Ashish Goyal Son Of Shri Radhe Shyam vs. Union Of INDIA

CRLMP/8016/2024HC RajasthanGSTCNR RJHC02101089202416 January 2025Bench: ANOOP KUMAR DHAND2 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

Facts

The petitioner, Ashish Goyal, is aggrieved by an order dated 22.08.2024 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (Economic Offences), Jaipur Metropolitan-II. This order took cognizance against the petitioner under Section 132 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The petitioner has filed a criminal miscellaneous petition before the High Court, challenging this cognizance order. The petitioner has not availed the alternative remedy of filing a revision petition under Section 438 of the BNSS, 2023, before the revisional authority, and has instead approached the High Court directly.

Held

The Court held that the order taking cognizance is a final order and is revisable under Section 438 of the BNSS, 2023. It is a well-settled proposition of law that when an alternative statutory remedy of filing a revision petition is available, a party cannot be permitted to bypass the jurisdiction of the revisional authority. Therefore, the criminal miscellaneous petition filed before the High Court was not maintainable without first exhausting the remedy of revision. The Court disposed of the petition, granting liberty to the petitioner to file a revision petition before the revisional authority within two weeks. The revisional authority was expected to decide the revision petition on its merits expeditiously, ignoring the period of limitation, if filed within the stipulated time.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner can bypass the statutory remedy of revision available under Section 438 of the BNSS, 2023, by directly filing a criminal miscellaneous petition before the High Court against an order taking cognizance under Section 132 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017? Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner has approached the High Court by way of a criminal miscellaneous petition. (No specific argument against the availability of the revisionary remedy was recorded). Respondent's Contention: The respondent, Union of India, through the Senior Intelligence Officer, Directorate General of Goods and Services Intelligence, implicitly relies on the principle that statutory remedies must be exhausted. (No specific argument was recorded, but the court's reasoning implies this position).

Sections Cited

Section 132, Section 438

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 8016/2024 Ashish Goyal Son of Shri Radhe Shyam, aged about 49 Years, Resident of House No. 1566, 1st Floor, Sector-4, District Rewari ( Haryana) Presently Confined in Central Jail, Jaipur. ----Petitioner Versus Union of India, Through Senior Intelligence Officer, Directorate General Of Goods And Services Intelligence (Jaipur Zonal Unit), Jaipur. ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Dheeraj Singhal For Respondent(s) : Mr. Kinshuk Jain with Mr. Jay Upadhyay Mr. Sourabh Jain Mr. Himanshu Agarwal JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND

Order 16/01/2025

Aggrieved by the order dated 22.08.2024 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (Economic Offences), Jaipur Metropolitan-II, the instant misc. petition has been preferred before this Court under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023. 2. By passing the impugned order, the learned Magistrate has taken cognizance against the petitioner under Section 132 of Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (for short, ‘the Act of 2017’).

Admittedly, the order of taking cognizance is a final order and the same is revisable under Section 438 of BNSS but without availing the alternative remedy of filing revision petition under

(2 of 2) [CRLMP-8016/2024] Section 438 of BNSS, the petitioner has straightaway approached this Court by way of filing of this criminal misc. petition.

It is a well settled proposition of law that whenever an alternative remedy of filing statutory revision petition is available with a person, he cannot be allowed to bypass the juri iction of the revisional authority.

The instant criminal misc. petition stands disposed of, granting liberty to the petitioner to file revision petition under Section 438 of BNSS before the revisional authority. In case, such revision petition is submitted by the petitioner before the revisional authority within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order, it is expected from the revisional authority to hear and decide the same on its merits expeditiously as early as possible, ignoring the period of limitation.

Stay application and all pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J Ashu/115

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.