Apaar Gupta Vs Prin. Addl. Director General of GST Intelligence Lko. And 2 Others (Allahabad High Court, Lucknow Bench)
The Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court delivered a ruling in the case of Apaar Gupta vs. Principal Additional Director General of GST Intelligence concerning the scope of powers of the GST intelligence agency during an investigation, specifically addressing the validity of summons, the right to copies of recorded statements, and the prohibition of coercive action.
Key Issues and Court’s Holding
The petitioner sought several reliefs, primarily challenging the repetitive nature of summons issued under Section 70 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (CGST Act), demanding copies of statements recorded under that section, seeking the release of seized goods, and requesting a blanket prohibition against any coercive action during the investigation.
1. Repeated Summons Under Section 70
The petitioner’s initial grievance was the repeated issuance of summons under Section 70 of the CGST Act, 2017, for recording his statement, despite having appeared multiple times. Section 70 grants power to the proper officer to summon any person whose attendance he considers necessary to give evidence or produce documents during an inquiry.
The High Court addressed this by passing an interim order directing the petitioner to appear on specified dates for the recording of his statement. Subsequently, the court noted that the petitioner’s statement had been recorded on July 24, 2025, and July 25, 2025, as confirmed by the department’s counsel. The departmental counsel assured the court that the petitioner’s statement was not currently required but indicated that further proceedings would continue as data was being retrieved from seized computers. The High Court, in response, granted the authorities the liberty to continue with the proceedings as per law, essentially concluding the issue of repetitive summons once the statement recording was completed as per the interim order.
