Case: In the case of Vivek Narsaria Vs State of Jharkhand (Jharkhand High Court) (W P No. (T) 4491 of 2023) dated 15/01/2024
Fact
- The taxpayer is the proprietor of M/s. Manish Trading Company, Lalgutwa, Ranchi, carrying on the business of trading of Iron & Steels and Cements.
- On 16.03.2023, an inspection was carried out by the Intelligence Bureau of the State Goods & Service Tax, and in terms thereof GST INS-01 has been issued.
- While the proceedings had been initiated by the State Goods & Services Tax Department, the taxpayer was served with a notice dated 10.04.2023 by the Preventive Branch of Central Goods & Services Tax, Ranchi with a direction to reverse the ITC along with interest & penalty on account of alleged purchases from the non-existent entity
- While two departments were in seisin of the proceedings, a search was carried out by the DGGI, Intelligence Branch of CGST on 06.06.2023. Various notices were issued from time to time viz., 07.06.2023; 21.06.2023 including Summons by the Preventive Wing dated 26.06.2023.
- Under the circumstances, taxpayer received summons from 3 Departments of GST, the taxpayer approached the Court, seeking a declaration that the authority who has initiated the proceedings prior in point of time, shall be the only authority to carry out the proceedings.
- The taxpayer relied upon N. No. 39/2017-CT dated 13.10.2017 and the Clarification bearing D.O.F. No. CBEC/20/43/01/2017- GST(Pt.) dated 5.10.2018. Reference was also made to the internal communication bearing F. No. CBEC-20/10/07/2019-GST by the GST Wing dated 22.06.2020, which provided for ‘the clarification on cross empowerment’.
- The taxpayer also contested that the attachment of Bank Accounts is bad in law, since the same suffers from the vices of excessive jurisdiction, inasmuch as, till date there is no determination of any liability whatsoever and as to whom the documents or statements are to be furnished as, the taxpayer cannot be made to succumb to the jurisdiction of all the three departments and as such, the attachment also is bad in law.
Held
- The court observed that the bare perusal of S. 6(2)(b), when read with the Clarification dated 05.10.2018, and with Clarification dated 22.06.2020, it clearly denotes & implies that it is a chain of a particular event happening under the Act and every & any enquiry/investigation carried out at the behest of any of the Department are interrelated.
- The officers of the DGGI does not enjoy any special power or privilege in comparison with the officers of the State GST Authorities
- The court directed the Preventive Wing of the CGST and DGGI Wing of the CGST, to forward all their investigation carried out as against the taxpayer and inter-related transaction to the State Authorities, who shall continue with the proceedings from the same stage and also directed to de-freeze the bank account.