In a recent case, the Andhra Pradesh High Court has allowed the examination of the alleged GST evader in the presence of an advocate and barred the detention beyond office hours.
In accordance with Section 70 of the Central Goods & Services Tax Act, 2017, the respondent department summoned Prakash Rao Ravinuthala, the petitioners, to appear before him and provide certain documents, among other things, pertaining to the affairs of M/s. Sri Tech Pro and M/s. Sri Vijaya Tech Pro. The reason for this was that they are the proprietaries of these companies.
No Allegation of Suppression or Fraud in GST S. 74 SCN: Madras HC directs to Treat S.74 Notice as S. 73 notice Enabling to Avail Amnesty Scheme[Read Order]
Received a GST Notice? Don’t Panic! – Click Here
The petitioners, who were offended by the summons, filed a Writ Petition to the court. The petitioner argued that their son had already been arrested after being the subject of an earlier investigation about GST avoidance. The petitioners further assert that they have no knowledge of the firms’ avoidance and are not aware of their son’s activities. The petitioners fear that their claim that they are unaware of the activities of any of these organizations will be rejected and that they will be the target of coercive tactics.
The court said that the department’s decision to accept or reject the explanation would depend on the statements made by the petitioners and the question of whether the department would accept the potential assertions. The petitioners would still be able to decline to appear before the agency.
Share Capital Received from Previous AY Cannot Be Taxable as Unexplained Cash Credit: ITAT Deletes Addition u/s 68 [Read Order]
Received a GST Notice? Don’t Panic! – Click Here
The division bench of Justice R Raghunandan Rao and Dr Justice K Manmadha Rao has directed the department to allow the petitioners to be accompanied by an advocate while they are being examined because the petitioners fear that they will be taken under duress and that their claim that they are unaware of the activities of any of these organizations won’t be believed.
The court ruled that the examination be held between 10:00 am and 5:00 pm during business hours, and that the petitioners would not be held after that time.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
