Allowed

Manisha Arunraj v. Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Gst)

Madras HC26 Oct 2021WP/22536/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court set aside an order imposing GST penalty under Section 122 both the TN-GST and CGST Acts, solely on the ground that an investigation is underway into alleged misuse of the petitioner's Aadhar and PAN cards for fraudulent registration. The revenue's right to proceed against any person is reserved, with the petitioner directed to update the authorities on the investigation status within th

What did the court decide?

Impugned order dated 08.02.2021 by first respondent and consequential order dated 23.07.2021 by second respondent set aside. Rights of Revenue preserved. Petitioner to update investigation status with

Manisha Arunraj Vs Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Gst) — GST and Indirect Tax | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 26.10.2021

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.SUNDAR

¶5

 W.P.NO.22536 OF 2021

¶6

 &
 WMP.NO.23760 OF 2021

¶7

Manisha Arunraj

¶8

... Petitioner

¶9

Vs

¶10

1. Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (GST),
 Commercial Taxes Department,
 Government of Tamil Nadu

¶11

 Ezhilagam, Chepauk, Chennai - 600 005.

¶12

2. The State Tax Officer,

¶13

 Group II/ Inspection, Intelligence-I,
 Station No.1, C.T.Admn. Building,

¶14

 Greams Road,

¶15

 Chennai - 600 006.

¶16

 ...Respondents

¶17

Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India to issue a Writ of Certiorari calling for the records of
the 2nd respondent herein leading to issuance of impugned order
(vide GSTIN. 33CVHPM5327C1ZU/2020-21) dated 08.02.2021.

¶18

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Sathiyanarayanan

¶19

ORDER

¶20

When this matter was taken up, Mr.S.Sathiyanarayanan,
learned counsel for writ petitioner was before this Virtual
Court and Ms. Amirta Dinakaran, learned Revenue counsel accepted
notice on behalf of the respondents.

¶21

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶22

2. There is no disputation or disagreement that the
captioned writ petition is directly and squarely covered by an
order dated 22.10.2021 made in W.P.No.22536 of 2021 and
W.M.P.No.23760 of 2021, which reads as follows:

¶23

'Captioned main writ petition has been
filed assailing an 'order dated 08.02.2021
bearing reference GSTIN.33CVHPM5327C1ZU/2019-20'
[hereinafter 'impugned order' for the sake of
convenience and clarity] made by first
respondent. The impugned order is under 'Tamil
Nadu Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (Tamil Nadu
Act 19 of 2017)' [hereinafter 'TN-GST Act' for
the sake of convenience and clarity] and 'Central
Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017' [hereinafter
'C-GST Act' for the sake of convenience and
clarity]. Impugned order is a sequel to a
surprise inspection and the impugned order has
been made on the basis that taxable person has
committed the offence of issuing invoice without
supply of goods in violation of TN-GST, C-GST
Acts and rules thereunder. To be noted, the
impugned order is passed on the opinion of the
Adjudicating Authority that taxable person has
committed such an offence. Further to be noted,
penalty has also been levied inter alia under
Section 122(1)(ii) of TN-GST and C-GST Acts.

¶24

2. Mr.S.Sathiyanarayanan, learned counsel
for writ petitioner submits that this has been
the consistent case of writ petitioner (even as
before the Adjudicating Authority) that someone
has misused Aadhar and PAN cards of writ
petitioner and got fake registration saying
business has been carried on in the name and
style of MMM Enterprises. The fact that this has
been the consistent plea of writ petitioner is
evident from the impugned order. Though this is
captured in many parts of the impugned order,
paragraph No.11 of the impugned order is of
relevance and the same reads as follows:

¶25

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶26

'11. The non-service of the show
cause notices dated 04.01.2021 and 25.01.2021
sent to the principal place of business
address and their return by the postal
authorities establishes the fact that the
named individual has not done business at the
registered place. The notices sent to the
residentialaddressoftheTaxable
person/Authorised representative have been
received by the taxable person. The details
of said addresses and the details of return
of the summons and show cause notices sent to
the said addresses is furnished supra in
preceding paragraphs. The taxable person as
per records as her business address clearly
prove that the taxable person is not doing
any business from that address. She has never
been an occupant of that premises and no
business has been done by her from that
address. The information furnished at the
time of registration in this regard is
established to be false.'

¶27

3. Ms.Amirta Dinakaran, learned
Revenue counsel accepts notice on behalf of
both the respondents.

¶28

4. This Court is of the view that
owing to the nature of the stand taken by the
writ petitioner and owing to this Court
noticing that a criminal complaint has been
lodged by the writ petitioner and
investigation is under-way, it would only be
appropriate to set aside the impugned order
without expressing any view or opinion on the
merits of the matter, leaving it open to
respondents to proceed afresh either against
writ petitioner or any other entity or person
depending on the outcome of investigation
that is under-way qua alleged misuse of writ
petitioner's Aadhar and PAN cards to obtain a
fake registration. Therefore, with the
consent of both sides, the main writ petition

¶29

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶30

is taken up.

¶31

5. It is seen that even prior to the
impugned order, writ petitioner in her reply
dated 05.02.2021 (reply to summons and notice
dated 25.01.2021 from the department) in
paragraph No.11 mentioned that she has lodged
a complaint on-line to the Police department.

¶32

6. Be that as it may, post impugned
order, the writ petitioner has lodged a
policecomplaintphysicallyinthe
jurisdictional police station vide CSR
No.219/2021 and the CSR receipt is as
follows:

¶33

7. Thereafter, 'First Information Report'
['FIR'] for alleged offence punishable under

¶34

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶35

Sections 419 and 420 of 'Indian Penal Code, 1860'
['IPC'] besides Sections 66C and 66D of
Information Technology Act, 2000, has been
registered. In the interregnum, the second
respondent has passed a consequential order dated
23.07.2021.

¶36

8. In the light of writ petitioner having
demonstrated her bona fides by
lodging an FIR, it is only appropriate that an
order as on the lines alluded to supra is made.

¶37

9. Captioned main writ petition is
disposed of by making the following order:

¶38

(a) Impugned order being order dated
08.02.2021bearingreference
GSTIN.33CVHPM5327C1ZU/2019-20 made by first
respondent and consequential order being
order dated 23.07.2021 bearing reference
GSTIN.33CVHPM5327C1ZU /(2) 2019-20 made by
second respondent are set aside solely on the
ground that alleged misuse of writ
petitioner's Aadhar and PAN Cards and
obtaining of fraudulent registration is under
investigation;

¶39

(b) In the light of aforementioned
limb of the order, though obvious, it is made
clear that no opinion or view on the merits
of the matter has been expressed in this
order;

¶40

(c) Rights of the Revenue i.e.,
respondents are preserved to proceed against
the writ petitioner or any other person or
entity being natural person or juristic
entity, subject to progress in the
investigation i.e., subject to further facts
unfurling in the investigation;

¶41

(d) Owing to this Court interfering
in this matter, limitation if any, will stand

¶42

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶43

preserved for both parties;

¶44

(e) The outcome of investigation or
updation shall be given by the writ
petitioner to the respondent within three
months from today i.e., by 21.01.2022. If it
is updated, this process shall continue once
in three months till the completion of
investigation.

¶45

10. Captioned Writ Petition is disposed
of with above directives. Consequently, writ
miscellaneous petition is also disposed of as
closed. There shall be no order as to costs.'

¶46

3. Therefore, captioned writ petition is disposed of by
making the following order:

¶47

(a) Impugned order being order dated
08.02.2021bearingreference
GSTIN.33CVHPM5327C1ZU /2020-21 made by first
respondent and consequential order being order
dated23.07.2021bearingreference
GSTIN.33CVHPM5327C1ZU /(2) 2020-21 made by second
respondent are set aside solely on the ground
that alleged misuse of writ petitioner's Aadhar
and PAN Cards and obtaining of fraudulent
registration is under investigation;

¶48

(b) In the light of aforementioned limb
of the order, though obvious, it is made clear
that no opinion or view on the merits of the
matter has been expressed in this order;

¶49

(c) Rights of the Revenue i.e.,
respondents are preserved to proceed against the
writ petitioner or any other person or entity
being natural person or juristic entity, subject
to progress in the investigation i.e., subject to
further facts unfurling in the investigation;

¶50

(d) Owing to this Court interfering in
this matter, limitation if any, will stand

¶51

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶52

preserved for both parties;

¶53

(e) The outcome of investigation or
updation shall be given by the writ petitioner to
the respondent within three months from today
i.e., by 26.01.2022. If it is updated, this
process shall continue once in three months till
the completion of investigation.'

¶54

Consequently, connected WMP is also disposed of as
closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶55

Sd/-

¶56

Assistant Registrar(CS-VII)

¶57

// True Copy //

¶58

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶59

gpa/nst

¶60

To

¶61

1. The Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (GST),
 Commercial Taxes Department,
 Government of Tamil Nadu
 Ezhilagam, Chepauk, Chennai - 600 005.

¶62

2. The State Tax Officer,
 Group II/ Inspection, Intelligence-I,
 Station No.1, C.T.Admn. Building,
 Greams Road,
 Chennai - 600 006.

¶63

+1cc to M/s.S.Sathiyanarayanan, Advocate, S.R.No.55233

¶64

+1cc to the Special Government Pleader, S.R.No.55931

¶65

W.P.No.22536 of 2021
 &
WMP.No.23760 of 2021

¶66

RP(CO)
RLP(17/11/2021)

¶67

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

Manisha Arunraj v. Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Gst)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manisha Arunraj v. Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Gst)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Tmt. Suganya Devi Vs The Commissioner

M/s. Alstom Transport India Ltd. Vs The Additional Director General

M.Balaraja Vs The Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation Ltd., (Tasmac)

M.Kandasamy Vs The Commissioner

Basf Catalysts India Pvt. Ltd. Vs The Additional / Joint / Deputy / Assistant Commissioner

Basf Catalysts India Pvt. Ltd. Vs The Additional / Joint / Deputy / Assistant Commissioner