Case Law Details
Agrawal Namkeen Vs Goods And Service Tax Council (Rajasthan High Court)
The case of Agrawal Namkeen vs Goods And Service Tax Council in the Rajasthan High Court revolves around the jurisdiction of the Joint Commissioner (Investigation) Enforcement Wing, Rajasthan–I, Jaipur, to adjudicate under Section 73 of the Rajasthan Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The petitioner argues that notifications do not empower the Joint Commissioner to act as an adjudicating authority beyond his jurisdiction. Conversely, the state contends that various notifications confer blanket powers on designated officers, including the Joint Commissioner, to exercise jurisdiction throughout the state. The court finds that while officers of certain ranks are authorized to adjudicate, their jurisdiction is limited to their respective areas. Thus, it restrains the respondents from taking coercive action against the petitioner based on the impugned order and grants time for filing returns and rejoinders. Recognizing the significance of the issue, the court aims to dispose of the petition expeditiously after completing the pleadings.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
1. Heard.
2. Learned counsel for the State would submit that various notifications passed from time to time conferring powers on various authorities for the purposes of exercise of powers under Section 73 of the Rajasthan Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017/Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act of 2017”) and other provisions have been placed on record.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner referring to provisions contained in Section 2(4), 2(24), 2(91), Section 5 and Section 73 of the Act of 2017 would submit that none of the notifications placed on record empowers the Joint Commissioner (Investigation) Enforcement Wing, Rajasthan–I, Jaipur to exercise powers and functions of adjudicating authority under Section 73 of the Act of 2017 in relation to the case of the petitioner inasmuch as the notifications do not confer power of adjudication under Section 73 of the Act of 2017 on Joint Commissioner (Investigation) Enforcement Wing, Rajasthan–I, Jaipur in relation to entire State of Rajasthan including Udaipur as notification dated 25.02.2020 confers jurisdiction to act as adjudicating authority within respective jurisdiction and not beyond that.
4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State would submit that notification dated 25.02.2020 has to be read along with notifications dated 20.01.2022, 02.11.2021, 08.09.2023, 18.09.2023 and 25.08.2023. He would further submit that Joint Commissioner (Investigation) Enforcement Wing, Rajasthan–I, Jaipur is designated as proper officer for the purposes of exercising powers under Section 73 of the Act of 2017 in relation to entire State of Rajasthan including Udaipur area as well.
5. Learned counsel representing the respondent No.1 – Goods And Service Tax Council, providing his assistance in this case, would submit that the notification dated 25.02.2020 confers blanket powers on the Joint Commissioner, Deputy Commissioner and Assistant Commissioner in the matter of exercise of powers under Section 73 of the Act of 2017 and unless otherwise directed, such power is exercisable throughout the State.
6. On prima facie considerations, we find that for the purposes of exercising powers of adjudicating authority under Section 73 of the Act of 2017, proper officer would be one who has been assigned that function as adjudicating authority. While notification dated 25.02.2020 provides that for the purposes of exercising powers under Section 73 of the Act of 2017, the officers of the rank of Joint Commissioner/Deputy Commissioner/Assistant Commissioner would be competent, the notification also clearly says that such power would be exercisable by them within their jurisdiction.
7. All other notifications which have been filed by the respondents do not show that in relation to exercise of powers of adjudicating authority under Section 73 of the Act of 2017, the jurisdiction of Joint Commissioner Enforcement Wing, Rajasthan–I, Jaipur has been extended beyond his jurisdiction including Udaipur jurisdiction.
8. In view of the above consideration, the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner requires serious consideration that the respondents did not have jurisdiction under the law to issue notice and to pass the impugned order.
9. Accordingly, respondents are restrained from taking any coercive action against the petitioner pursuant to the impugned order dated 04.01.2024.
10. Learned counsel for the respective respondents are granted three weeks’ time to file their return followed by rejoinders that may be filed within a further period of two weeks.
11. List the matter on 12.07.2024.
12. Considering the nature and importance of issue raised in this petition, we are inclined to finally dispose off this petition in motion stage as soon as the pleadings are complete.
Author Bio
