Home Case Index All Cases GST GST + HC GST - 2023 (12) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (12) TMI 235 - HC - GSTInitiation of recovery proceedings - issuance of notice under Section 62 of the Land Revenue Act - Petitioner had been asked to appear before the Tehsildar on 4th of October, 2023 to deposit the default amount along with two percent of recovery charges. HELD THAT - Since, the State Taxes (Recovery) Officer had taken up the matter with the District Collector, Srinagar for recovery and, it appears that he had assigned the matter to Special Tehsildar, Recoveries, Srinagar for further proceedings in the matter. Rule 155 of the Goods and Services Tax Rules provides as to how the Land Revenue Authority has to recover the amount. It provides that where an amount is to be recovered in accordance with the provisions of clause (e) to Sub-Section (1) of Section 79 of the Goods and Services Tax Act, the Proper Officer shall send a certificate to the concerned Deputy Commissioner, vested with the power of Collector under the Jammu Kashmir Land Revenue Act, Samvat 1996, in form GST DRC-18 to recover from the person concerned, the amount specified in the certificate, as if it were an arrear of land revenue. As, the Proper Officer of the Taxes Department had moved the Deputy Commissioner, Srinagar, who is the Collector of the District in form GST DRC-18 in his communication dated 25th of March, 2023, therefore, there does not seem to be any illegality as to how the Petitioner is aggrieved of the recovery proceedings against him initiated through the office of Special Tehsildar Recoveries, Srinagar. The arrest and detention of the defaulter is provided under Section 63 of the Jammu Kashmir Land Revenue Act, authorizing the Revenue Officer, not below the rank of Tehsildar, to issue a warrant directing to arrest the defaulter and bring him before the Revenue Officer and, on such production, the Revenue Officer may cause him to be taken before the Collector or may order that he be confined to civil jail for a period not exceeding six days and then, if the arrear is still unpaid, cause him to be taken before the Collector and, for the continued default, the Collector can confine the defaulter in jail for such period not exceeding one month from the date of the order, as the Collector thinks fit. The contention of the learned Counsel for the Petitioner that the non-bailable warrant dated 19th of August, 2023 has been issued to him and has not been recalled, though applied for, seems to be an incorrect statement in view of the summons issued on 22nd of September, 2023 to the Petitioner for appearing before the Court of Special Tehsildar Recoveries, Srinagar on 4th of October, 2023. It appears that the Petitioner has been labouring under a misconception that the Tehsildar Recoveries is not a competent authority to recover the tax amount from him by issuing writ of demand/ summon to the Petitioner as defaulter and, in default, to issue nonbailable warrant. The instant Petition seems to be misconceived and, therefore, the proceedings initiated by the Respondent No.4 against the Petitioner do not call for any interference by this Court - Petition dismissed.
Issues Involved:
1. Competency of the Special Tehsildar Recovery to issue recovery proceedings and non-bailable warrants. 2. Compliance with previous Court orders by the Respondent No.4. 3. Legality of the recovery process under the GST Act and the Jammu & Kashmir Land Revenue Act. Summary: Competency of the Special Tehsildar Recovery: The Petitioner argued that the Special Tehsildar Recoveries is not a competent authority to initiate proceedings against him for tax default, asserting that only the District Collector has such authority under the Jammu & Kashmir Land Revenue Act. The Court examined the relevant provisions of the GST Act and the Jammu & Kashmir Land Revenue Act, concluding that the Special Tehsildar Recoveries, acting under the instructions of the District Collector, has the jurisdiction to issue writs of demand and non-bailable warrants for tax recovery. Compliance with Previous Court Orders: The Petitioner claimed that the Respondent No.4 did not comply with the Court's previous order dated 14th August 2023, which directed the Respondent to first decide the issue of maintainability and jurisdiction before proceeding on merits. The Court found that the non-bailable warrant was issued on 19th August 2023, prior to the Respondent No.4 receiving the Court's order on 22nd August 2023. Therefore, the Respondent could not be held in contempt for actions taken before being informed of the Court's directive. Legality of the Recovery Process: The Respondent's counsel argued that the recovery process was initiated following the proper legal framework, with the Deputy Commissioner, State Taxes (Recovery), certifying the amount due and requesting the District Collector to recover it as land revenue. The Court upheld the legality of the recovery process, citing Section 79 of the GST Act and Sections 61, 62, and 63 of the Jammu & Kashmir Land Revenue Act, which authorize the Special Tehsildar Recoveries to take coercive measures, including issuing non-bailable warrants for tax recovery. Conclusion: The Court dismissed the Petition, finding no merit in the arguments presented by the Petitioner. The proceedings initiated by the Special Tehsildar Recoveries were deemed lawful, and the interim directions were vacated.
|