Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
M.NAGAPRASANNA
Gunnam Infra Projects Private Limited – Appellant
Versus
Union of India Rep. by the Secretary, Department of Revenue, New Delhi – Respondent
ORDER :
1. The petitioner - assessee is at the doors of this Court calling in question certain deficiency memos issued by the 6th respondent - Deputy Commissioner of Central Tax on two different dates i.e., on 20-05-2025 and 21-05-2025, rejecting the petitioner’s application for refund of the amount in DRC-03 forms.
2. Facts in brief, germane, are as follows:
2.1. The petitioner - assessee is a private limited company, registered under the provisions of the Companies Act, 2013 and is said to be duly registered under the Goods and Services Tax enactment. On 08-06-2023, officers from the Director General of GST Intelligence and the Anti-Evasion Unit conduct simultaneous inspection at the registered office premises of the petitioner- Company purportedly under Section 67 (1) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (‘CGST Act’). During the course of the proceedings, it is the case of the petitioner that he was compelled to make immediate payment of Rs.2,42,00,000/- in form DRC-03 as obtaining under Section 74 (5) of the CGST Act, to avoid threat of adverse consequences.
2.2. After the inspection conducted on 08-06-2023, summons was issued on 24-11-2023 directing the authorized repre
Payments made under coercion during tax inspections cannot be construed as voluntary; proper procedures must be followed for valid refund claims.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of voluntary tax payments and the consequences of non-compliance with the prescribed procedure, as well as the liability for interes....
Point Of Law: Determination of tax not paid or short paid or erroneously refunded or input tax credit wrongly availed or utilised by reason of fraud or any wilfulmisstatement or suppression of facts.
Payments made under coercion during a search are not voluntary and must be refunded if proper acknowledgment is not provided.
Section 74(6) which states that the proper officer, on receipt of such information from the assessee, shall not serve any notice under Section 74(1) of the CGST Act to such assessee.
The court affirmed that a taxpayer's voluntary admission of dues and conditions related to cash seizure supersedes claims of coercion, leading to dismissal of the petition.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
