Nitin Goel vs. Directorate General Of GST Intelligence (Dggi)

Facts

The petitioner, Nitin Goel, filed a writ petition before the Delhi High Court seeking a writ of mandamus to prevent coercive action, including arrest, by the Directorate General of GST Intelligence (DGGI) until the investigation was complete. The petitioner also sought directions for the DGGI to conduct investigations in compliance with Instruction No. 01/2022-23 and applicable legal frameworks. The Delhi High Court had previously granted interim protection against coercive action until the next date. The respondent, DGGI, through its counsel, raised a preliminary objection regarding the territorial jurisdiction of the Delhi High Court, stating that the investigating authority was the DGGI, Jaipur Zonal Unit, and not DGGI, Delhi, and that the cause of action arose in Jaipur. The petitioner, without prejudice to their jurisdictional arguments, sought to withdraw the petition to approach the High Court of Rajasthan, Bench at Jaipur, and requested an extension of the interim protection.

Held

The Court noted the respondent's submission regarding the lack of territorial jurisdiction, as the investigating authority was the DGGI, Jaipur Zonal Unit, and the cause of action arose in Jaipur. The petitioner, while not conceding the jurisdictional issue, sought to withdraw the petition to approach the High Court of Rajasthan, Bench at Jaipur. The Court allowed the withdrawal of the petition. The interim protection granted to the petitioner against coercive action until the next date was extended until March 3, 2025, to enable the petitioner to approach the jurisdictional High Court. The Court clarified that any further extension of interim protection would be considered by the High Court of Rajasthan on its own merits. The petition was disposed of in terms of this order.

Key Issues

1. Whether the Delhi High Court has territorial jurisdiction to entertain the present writ petition, considering the investigating authority is the DGGI, Jaipur Zonal Unit, and the petitioner has arrayed DGGI, Delhi as the respondent? (Question of law) Petitioner's arguments: The petitioner contended that the Delhi High Court also has territorial jurisdiction to entertain the petition. However, without prejudice to this contention, they sought to withdraw the petition to approach the jurisdictional High Court in Rajasthan. Respondent's arguments: The respondent argued that the Delhi High Court lacks territorial jurisdiction because the investigating authority, DGGI, Jaipur Zonal Unit, is based in Jaipur, and the summons issued to the petitioner, which gave rise to the cause of action, originated from Jaipur. Therefore, the petition should be filed before the High Court of Rajasthan, Bench at Jaipur.