K.E. Agro Products (P.) Ltd. VS State Tax Officer (IB)-I

Writ Appeals (WA) No.177, WA No.178, and WA No.181 of 2022 were filed in response to the judgment rendered in Writ Petitions (WP) Nos.20455, 20453, and 20447 of 2021, respectively. All three Writ Petitions raised a common question, prompting the learned Single Judge to issue a unified judgment. The central issue pertained to the accessibility of copies of statements recorded by the respondents during their investigation and the non-collection of taxes for the outward supply of rice.

The appellants in all three appeals are taxpayers under the Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST) and State Goods and Services Tax (SGST) Act of 2017, engaging in the outward supply of rice and bran. The Sales Tax Officer initiated an inquiry in connection with their activities, leading to the issuance of notices or orders that the appellants contested.

The core contention revolves around the denial of access to copies of statements recorded by the investigating authorities and allegations regarding the non-collection of taxes for the outward supply of rice. These matters prompted the filing of Writ Petitions, which were subsequently consolidated due to their shared nature.

The judgment in question likely delved into the legal and procedural aspects surrounding the appellants’ rights to access documentation related to investigations, as well as the tax implications of their business activities concerning rice and bran supply. The decision rendered by the Single Judge sought to address these concerns comprehensively, leading to the subsequent filing of appeals by the aggrieved parties.

The cases in question, WA No.177 of 2022, WA No.178 of 2022, and WA No.181 of 2022, were brought against the judgments in WP(C) Nos.20455 of 2021, No.20453 of 2021, and WP(C) No.20447 of 2021, respectively. The common issue among these cases pertained to the grant of copies of statements recorded by respondents during investigations and the non-collection of taxes for outward supplies of rice.

The appellants in all three appeals were taxpayers under the CGST/SGST Act, 2017, engaged in the outward supply of rice and bran. The Sales Tax Officer issued summons to one of the Directors of the company, Sri. Melvin T Mathew, for inquiry. Subsequently, statements were recorded from him. The appellants filed separate applications requesting copies of these statements and the transfer of inquiry files to their chosen locations. However, the respondents rejected these requests without providing specific reasons.

The appellants challenged these rejection orders before the learned Single Judge through respective writ petitions. In response, the respondents argued, particularly in W.P.(C) No.20453 of 2021, that the information gathered during the inquiry was sensitive and crucial, and sharing copies or extracts of statements could prejudice the ongoing investigation. The learned Single Judge, after considering Section 67(5) and Section 70 of the Act, concluded that the only reason provided for denying the requests was insufficient.

Download PDF:

For Reference Visit:
Kerala High Court 

Read Another Case Law:
GST Case Law