M/S. Alfa Enterprise Its Propreitor Ramis Alimohammad Dalal vs. State Of Gujarat

Held

The Court did not enter into the merits of the matter. The petitioner sought permission to withdraw the petition based on the submissions made by the learned Assistant Government Pleader. The Assistant Government Pleader stated that the respondents are bound by the directions given in the decision of this Court in the case of Vimal Yashwantgiri Goswami Versus State of Gujarat and Others (SCA No. 13679 of 2019) and other allied matters, and that no coercive steps would be taken contrary to those directions. Consequently, the petitioner sought to withdraw the petition at that stage. The Court disposed of the petition as withdrawn, discharged the notice, and vacated the interim relief. No specific finding was given on the legal questions raised, as the matter was settled by withdrawal.

Facts

The petitioner, M/s. Alfa Enterprise, through its proprietor Ramis Alimohammad Dalal, filed a Special Civil Application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India before the Gujarat High Court. The petitioner sought a writ of mandamus or similar order to restrain the respondent authorities from taking action under Section 69 read with Section 132 of the GST Acts without following the due process of assessment and adjudication under Section 73/74 of the GST Acts for alleged tax evasion. The petitioner apprehended coercive steps without proper opportunity of being heard or verification of documents. A coordinate bench had previously granted ad-interim relief, restraining coercive action.

Key Issues

1. Whether the respondent authorities can initiate action under Section 69 read with Section 132 of the GST Acts without first following the due process of assessment and adjudication under Section 73/74 of the GST Acts for alleged evasion of tax liability? The petitioner argued that the respondent authorities should not take coercive steps under Sections 69 and 132 of the GST Acts without adhering to the established procedures for assessment and adjudication under Sections 73 and 74. The petitioner's primary concern was the apprehension of coercive action without a proper basis, opportunity to be heard, or verification of evidence. The revenue, represented by the Assistant Government Pleader, submitted that the respondents are bound by the directions of this Court in the case of Vimal Yashwantgiri Goswami Versus State of Gujarat and Others (SCA No. 13679 of 2019) and allied matters, implying that no coercive steps would be taken contrary to those directions.