Neeraj Kumar Ojha VS Additional Director General Directorate General Of GST Intelligence, Coimbatore

Mr. B. Sathish Sundar, representing the petitioner, and Mr. A.P. Srinivas, representing the Income Tax department, were present before the court. Despite various claims and arguments put forth in the petitioner’s affidavit, Mr. Sundar, on behalf of the petitioner, expressed a willingness to narrow down the prayer in the writ petition. Specifically, they requested a direction for the first respondent to address a representation dated 18.06.2019, which had been received by the respondent on 27.06.2019. Copies of both the representation and its postal acknowledgment were submitted to the court.

With the consent of both counsels, the court proceeded to hear and dispose of the main writ petition, considering the narrowed scope of the issue at hand.

The crux of the matter revolves around proceedings initiated against the petitioner under the Central Goods and Services Act, 2017 (CGST Act), including criminal prosecution, and the provisional attachment of the petitioner’s Savings Bank account.

Through the mentioned representation, the petitioner had appealed to the first respondent to lift the aforementioned attachment. It is contended by the petitioner’s counsel that this representation has not elicited any response from the first respondent, resulting in alleged inaction.

Given the focused nature of the petition, the court issued a directive to the first respondent to promptly address the petitioner’s representation from 18.06.2019 within a maximum period of six weeks from the receipt of this order. Furthermore, the respondent is instructed to communicate the decision regarding the representation to the petitioner within seven working days from its disposal.

Mr. B. Sathish Sundar, representing the petitioner, appeared before the court, while Mr. A.P. Srinivas, representing the Income Tax department, acknowledged receipt of notice on behalf of both respondents. Despite various contentions and grounds presented in support of the writ petition, Mr. Sundar, on behalf of the petitioner, submitted that the prayer would be abridged to seeking direction for the disposal of a representation dated June 18, 2019, received by the first respondent on June 27, 2019. Copies of the representation and postal acknowledgment were submitted to the court.

With the consent of both counsels, the court proceeded to hear and dispose of the main writ petition, now focused on this specific issue.

The petition’s scope was significantly narrowed, eliminating the need for detailed discussion of facts. Succinctly, the petitioner faced proceedings under the Central Goods and Services Act, 2017, including criminal prosecution, with the provisional attachment of their Savings Bank account.

The petitioner had written to the first respondent requesting the lifting of the attachment through the aforementioned representation. It was argued that the first respondent had not responded, leading to alleged inaction.

Considering the limited scope of the petition, the court directed the first respondent to expeditiously dispose of the petitioner’s representation within six weeks from the receipt of the court’s order. Communication of the disposal to the petitioner was to be done within seven working days thereafter.

The writ petition was disposed of accordingly, with no costs imposed.