Case Law Details
R.S. Enterprises Vs State of Bihar & Ors. (Patna High Court)
In a recent development at the Patna High Court, the case of R.S. Enterprises Vs State of Bihar & Ors. involves allegations of non-compliance with Section 100 of the CrPC during a GST inspection. This article provides a detailed analysis of the court’s order and its implications.
Detailed Analysis:
1. Legal Context and Allegations: The petitioners in the case have argued that the inspection conducted under the Bihar Goods and Services Tax Act did not adhere to Section 100 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC). Section 100 mandates that any inspection must be conducted in the presence of two witnesses.
2. Court’s Prima Facie Opinion: The Patna High Court, while considering the arguments, has expressed a prima facie opinion that the absence of objections during the inspection or before the Assessing Officer does not preclude the petitioners from challenging the legality of the inspection. The court noted that such a ground, if proven, could fundamentally affect the validity of the inspection process.
3. Court’s Directive: In response to the petition, the court has directed the respondents (State of Bihar & Ors.) to file a counter affidavit. This affidavit must include sufficient evidence demonstrating that the inspection was indeed conducted in compliance with the requirement of two witnesses as per Section 100 of the CrPC.
4. Stay on Recovery: As part of its interim order, the Patna High Court has granted a stay on any recovery actions until the matter is further heard. This temporary relief aims to maintain the status quo pending the court’s examination of the evidence presented by the respondents.
5. Future Proceedings: The case is scheduled to be heard next on June 28, 2024. Until then, both parties will have the opportunity to present their arguments and evidence before the court makes a final determination on the validity of the GST inspection and subsequent actions.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF PATNA HIGH COURT
The inspection conducted which led to Annexure-P/1 report and the assessment order did not comply with the provisions of the CrPC, is the argument. Section 67 of the Bihar Goods and Services Tax Act specifically requires an inspection to be conducted in accordance with the Criminal Procedure Code. Section 100 of the CrPC mandates that there shall be two witnesses when the inspection is conducted.
2. The learned Government Advocate submits that the inspection report has not been produced in its totality. It is also submitted that the report was accepted by the petitioners representative without demur and there was no such contention raised before the Assessing Officer.
3. We are of the prima facie opinion that merely because no such objection was raised before the inspecting team or the Assessing Officer, it would not restrict the petitioner from raising a ground which goes to the very root of the matter, to vitiate the inspection conducted.
4. In such circumstances, we direct the respondents to file a counter affidavit producing sufficient evidence to show the inspection having been conducted in the presence of two witnesses.
5. Post this matter on 28th of June, 2024.
6. In the meantime, there shall be stay of recovery.
Author Bio
