No Invoking of Writ Jurisdiction on Grievance that GST Dept had Coerced Assessee to Deposit Tax Amounts: Bombay HC [Read Order]

In a recent decision, the Bombay High Court observed that the writ jurisdiction cannot be invoked on grievance that GST Department had coerced assessee to deposit tax amounts.

The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner was forced to deposit an amount of Rs.2,50,00,000/- ( Rupees Two Crores Fifty lakhs only ) on 13 October 2022 that too at 3.30 a.m. It is petitioner’s contention that the said amount was recovered by the respondents from the petitioner by coercion, hence, the petitioner is entitled to refund of the said amount, on the ground that this would amount to collection/retention of the petitioner’s amounts without any authority in law.

The petitioner has averred in the petition that search and seizure action was resorted by the respondents at the petitioner’s premises on 12 October 2022. It commenced at 12.50 p.m. According to the petitioner, it continued upto mid-night i.e. upto 3.30 a.m. when the petitioner was forced to deposit the said amount. It is difficult to accept the case of the petitioner that there was a coercion of the nature as alleged by the petitioner.

Thus, the case of the petitioner in the present facts, in regard to any coercion or allegation of any criminal act against the respondent cannot be accepted, not only on account of the petitioner’s letter dated 13 October 2022, addressed by the petitioner to respondent No.1, but also on the petitioner’s own conduct which does not inspire any confidence for the writ Court to accept such contention.

The Counsel for the respondents submitted that a show cause notice would be issued to the petitioner within four weeks from today. We accept such statement. If that be so, we are of the opinion that, keeping open all contentions of the parties, the prayers of the petitioner for making claim of such amount should be left to be considered by the appropriate Officer of the respondent as per law.

A Division Bench of Justices Firdosh P Pooniwalla and GS Kulkarni observed that “We may also observe that when an assessee comes before the Court invoking jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution and that too making a serious grievance that the department had coerced the assessee to deposit the tax amounts, certainly as to whether it is genuinely a coercion or whether it was a voluntary deposit, as seen in the present case, is purely a disputed question of fact. Such question cannot be gone into and appreciated in the proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution.”

“In fact, in such circumstances, a tax already being deposited and a relief of refund thereof being sought in considering grant of such relief in the proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution and that too for refund of money, would amount to the Court converting proceedings of a writ petition into proceedings akin to a proceeding of a civil suit, as necessarily it would require appreciation of evidence. Considering the settled principles of law as laid down in catena of decisions, such exercise is not possible to be undertaken in the summary, discretionary proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution, albeit in a given case, the Court may chose to exercise its discretion, in the event, facts are absolutely glaring and gross that a reasonable body of persons cannot resort to a highhanded and illegal action” the Court noted.

To Read the full text of the Order CLICK HERE

Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates