Home Case Index All Cases GST GST + HC GST - 2019 (6) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (6) TMI 102 - HC - GSTConstitutional validity of Sections 67(10), 69(1), 70, 132(5) and 135 of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 - power of arrest u/s 69(1) of the Act only after completion of the assessment - HELD THAT - Division Bench of this Court in 2019 (4) TMI 1320 - TELANGANA AND ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT had dismissed the Writ Petitions holding that the prosecutions for offences under GST do not depend upon the completion of assessment and herefore, the argument that there cannot be an arrest even before adjudication or assessment, does not appeal to us These orders were challenged by the petitioners therein in Special Leave to Appeal in P.V. RAMANA REDDY VERSUS UNION OF INDIA ORS. 2019 (5) TMI 1528 - SUPREME COURT before the Supreme Court and on 27.05.2019, a Bench presided over by the Hon'ble the Chief Justice of India dismissed the said Special Leave Petitions. Therefore, when the very arrest of the petitioners is not prohibited prior to the completion of the assessment, any coercive action lesser than arrest, can not also be said to be prohibited. The interim order granted on 15.05.2019 in W.P.No.10350 of 2019 is vacated. List the Writ Petitions on 03.06.2019 in ML.
Issues:
Constitutional validity of Sections 67(10), 69(1), 70, 132(5), and 135 of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 challenged. Interpretation of power of arrest under Section 69(1) of the Act in relation to completion of assessment and compliance with summons by CGST authorities. Analysis: The petitioners challenged the constitutional validity of certain sections of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017, specifically focusing on the power of arrest under Section 69(1) of the Act. They contended that the arrest can only be made after the completion of assessment and upon raising a demand on the petitioners, and if necessary due to non-compliance with summons issued by CGST authorities. A Division Bench of the High Court dismissed the Writ Petitions, stating that the launch of prosecution does not depend on the completion of assessment as per Section 132 of the Act. Offenses like issuing invoices without supplying goods and availing Input Tax Credit are punishable under the Act, irrespective of assessment completion. The Court declined to grant relief against arrest, despite acknowledging certain incongruities within the Act. The petitioners appealed these orders in the Supreme Court through Special Leave Petitions, which were dismissed by a Bench led by the Chief Justice of India. The High Court, considering the Supreme Court's decision, ruled that since the Act does not prohibit arrest before assessment completion, any coercive action less severe than arrest is also not prohibited. Consequently, the interim orders granted to the petitioners were vacated, leading to the dismissal of similar interim orders obtained by other petitioners standing on the same grounds. The Court scheduled the Writ Petitions for further proceedings on a specified date.
|