The core issue in this petition relates to the dispute as to the classification of the entry under which the transaction made by the petitioner no.1 with the State of West Bengal will fall.
Section 70 of the CGST Act —Summons – The court observed that the core issue relates to the dispute as to the classification. This court on 31st December, 2020 passed an interim directing the respondents not to take any coercive steps against the petitioners. The respondent issued summons directing the petitioner to appear before the CGST authorities to provide evidence, tender statement and produce documents, however, they did not appear on the respective dates. Two applications were filed, first filed by respondents for vacating the order dated 31st December, 2020 passed in the writ petition and second filed by the petitioners for extension of the interim order dated 31st December, 2020.
Held that:- The Hon’ble High Court directed the petitioners to cooperate with the IO by producing the documents as required for the purpose of inquiry. The person who will produce the document shall be released after prima facie scrutiny of the documents on the date of production. The IO after detailed scrutiny of the documents produced will be free to issue a further summons for any other document which he feels necessary to be produced for the purpose of inquiry. The IO, if required, call for the attendance of the person for giving evidence and/or recording of statement.
The core issue in this petition relates to the dispute as to the classification of the entry under which the transaction made by the petitioner no.1 with the State of West Bengal will fall.
Section 70 of the CGST Act —Summons – The court observed that the core issue relates to the dispute as to the classification. This court on 31st December, 2020 passed an interim directing the respondents not to take any coercive steps against the petitioners. The respondent issued summons directing the petitioner to appear before the CGST authorities to provide evidence, tender statement and produce documents, however, they did not appear on the respective dates. Two applications were filed, first filed by respondents for vacating the order dated 31st December, 2020 passed in the writ petition and second filed by the petitioners for extension of the interim order dated 31st December, 2020.
Held that:- The Hon’ble High Court directed the petitioners to cooperate with the IO by producing the documents as required for the purpose of inquiry. The person who will produce the document shall be released after prima facie scrutiny of the documents on the date of production. The IO after detailed scrutiny of the documents produced will be free to issue a further summons for any other document which he feels necessary to be produced for the purpose of inquiry. The IO, if required, call for the attendance of the person for giving evidence and/or recording of statement.