Naman Goyal And Another v. The Directorate General Of Gst Intelligence And Another
Case note by CA Nikhil Gupta
Case overview
This Allahabad High Court decision concerns GST statutory provision - Section 70. The retained release ledger records the outcome as Disposed and classifies the matter under Search, Summons & Arrest.
Facts and procedural background
Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:185098-DB
Chief Justice's Court Case :- WRIT TAX No. - 1028 of 2023 Petitioner :- Naman Goyal And Another Respondent :- The Directorate General Of Gst Intelligence And Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Fatma Khatoon Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Pritinker Diwaker,Chief Justice Hon'ble Ashutosh Srivastava,J.
1. Heard Ms. Fatma Khatoon, learned counsel for the petitioners and Shri Parv Agarwal, learned counsel for respondent Nos. 1 and 2.
Issues before the Court
Hon'ble Pritinker Diwaker,Chief Justice Hon'ble Ashutosh Srivastava,J.
1. Heard Ms. Fatma Khatoon, learned counsel for the petitioners and Shri Parv Agarwal, learned counsel for respondent Nos. 1 and 2.
2. By the impugned order dated 4.8.2023, summons under Section 70 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 have been issued requiring the petitioners to appear before the authority concerned for recording their statements.
Court's analysis and findings
2. By the impugned order dated 4.8.2023, summons under Section 70 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 have been issued requiring the petitioners to appear before the authority concerned for recording their statements.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that summons have been unnecessarily issued and petitioners have already submitted objections in that regard.
4. Shri Parv Agarwal, learned counsel for respondent Nos. 1 and 2 submits that summons under Section 70 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 have been issued for getting the statements of the petitioners recorded in an investigation that is being conducted.
5. In our opinion, the petitioners may comply with the summons and get the statements recorded before the authority concerned. Let, this exercise be done within three weeks from the date of service of certified copy of the order of this Court
Decision and relief
Order Date :- 25.9.2023 Ravi Prakash
(Ashutosh Srivastava, J.) (Pritinker Diwaker, CJ.)
2023-09-26T14:50:39+0530 High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
2023-09-26T14:50:40+0530 High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Ratio and practical significance
The binding effect flows from the court's operative reasoning reproduced below, read in the context of the pleaded facts and statutory provisions. Users should not generalise the result beyond materially comparable facts.
- Map the operative reasoning to the exact GST provision and procedural stage.
- Confirm whether a later review, appeal, SLP or subsequent judgment affects reliance.
- Preserve the official case number, decision date and neutral citation in professional work.
Full judgment text
Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:185098-DB
Chief Justice's Court Case :- WRIT TAX No. - 1028 of 2023 Petitioner :- Naman Goyal And Another Respondent :- The Directorate General Of Gst Intelligence And Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Fatma Khatoon Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Pritinker Diwaker,Chief Justice Hon'ble Ashutosh Srivastava,J.
1. Heard Ms. Fatma Khatoon, learned counsel for the petitioners and Shri Parv Agarwal, learned counsel for respondent Nos. 1 and 2.
2. By the impugned order dated 4.8.2023, summons under Section 70 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 have been issued requiring the petitioners to appear before the authority concerned for recording their statements.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that summons have been unnecessarily issued and petitioners have already submitted objections in that regard.
4. Shri Parv Agarwal, learned counsel for respondent Nos. 1 and 2 submits that summons under Section 70 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 have been issued for getting the statements of the petitioners recorded in an investigation that is being conducted.
5. In our opinion, the petitioners may comply with the summons and get the statements recorded before the authority concerned. Let, this exercise be done within three weeks from the date of service of certified copy of the order of this Court
6. With the aforesaid observations, this writ petition is disposed of.
Order Date :- 25.9.2023 Ravi Prakash
(Ashutosh Srivastava, J.) (Pritinker Diwaker, CJ.)
2023-09-26T14:50:39+0530 High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
2023-09-26T14:50:40+0530 High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Finin2min Q&A
What court decided this case?
Allahabad High Court
What was the case number?
WRIT TAX No. 1028 of 2023
When was the decision delivered?
2023-09-25
Which GST provisions are identified in the case?
GST statutory provision - Section 70
What was the recorded outcome?
Disposed
Is the complete judgment text available here?
Yes. This page includes a faithful local rendition of the full text recovered from the issuing court source.
Should this page substitute professional advice?
No. Verify the official citation and later history before professional reliance.
Who authored the Finin2min case note?
CA Nikhil Gupta.