Cancer Patient Summoned Under GST: Bombay HC Allows Videography of Proceedings & Advocate's Presence With Conditions [Read Order]

In a recent ruling, the Bombay High Court permitted videography of GST summons proceedings in the case of a cancer patient and allowed the presence of an advocate at a visible but not audible distance, subject to conditions.

Tuesonpower International Pvt. Ltd. and another petitioner approached the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution challenging a summons issued under Section 70of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The summons was issued particularly to Petitioner No. 2 in connection with an inquiry regarding input tax credit availed by Petitioner No.1 company on purchases from Zes Stock Enterprises and New Era Enterprises.

According to the petitioners, the transactions were genuine and supported by valid tax invoices which were reflected in GSTR-2B returns. They stated that payments were made through proper banking channels. The petitioners also stated that the GST registrations of the said suppliers were cancelled and that the suppliers have filed statutory appeals which are pending before the authorities.

The petitioners’ counsel submitted that they are ready and willing to cooperate with the inquiry. It was also brought to the notice of the Court that Petitioner No. 2 is suffering from cancer and is undergoing treatment. The petitioners confined their relief to two limited prayers.

They sought permission for Petitioner No. 2 to be accompanied by an advocate during the summons proceedings, with the advocate sitting at a visible but not audible distance. They also sought a direction that the proceedings be videographed at their own cost.

The counsel for the respondents argued that Petitioner No. 2 must cooperate in the inquiry and provide all necessary documents and information. They submitted that the proceedings are conducted in premises equipped with CCTV cameras and that no separate direction for videography or additional safeguards was required.

The Division Bench comprising Justice G.S. Kulkarni and Justice Aarti Sathe observed that the summons was issued under Section 70 of the CGST Act and that the inquiry concerned input tax credit availed by the company. The court observed that Petitioner No. 2 is undergoing cancer treatment and that the petitioners have expressed willingness to cooperate with the investigation. The court also observed that in Suumaya Industries Ltd. v. Union of India, a Co-ordinate Bench had accepted a similar arrangement.

The court explained that considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case including the medical condition of Petitioner No. 2 and the limited nature of the relief sought, the request could be granted. The court made it clear that the order was being passed in the specific facts of the case and should not be treated as a precedent.

The court directed that the statement of Petitioner No.2 in the summons inquiry be video recorded at the cost of the petitioners. It also permitted the advocate to accompany Petitioner No. 2 during the inquiry with the condition that the advocate shall not interfere, interrupt or disturb the recording of the statement and may sit at a visible but not audible distance. The writ petition was disposed of.

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