In a recent turn of events, the Supreme Court of India, on August 25, issued a significant notice in response to two similar writ petitions filed under Article 32 of the Constitution of India. These petitions challenge the constitutional validity of certain provisions within the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (CGST Act), most notably Section 69 and Section 70(1). This unprecedented move has sparked immense interest and debate within the legal and taxation circles, as it questions the very foundation of powers vested in the government under the CGST Act.
Understanding the Writ Petitions
The writ petitions, brought before the apex court, shed light on the contentious Sections 69 and 70(1) of the CGST Act. The petitioners assert that these sections, which deal with powers of arrest and summoning persons for evidence, respectively, are unconstitutional due to their criminal nature. The crux of their argument lies in the assertion that these provisions could not have been enacted under Article 246A of the Constitution of India, 1950.
Constitutionality Under Scrutiny
At the heart of the matter is the question of legislative competence. The petitioners contend that the power to arrest and prosecute, as provided by Sections 69 and 70(1), does not directly correlate to the power to levy and collect goods and services tax. This argument hinges on the interpretation of Entry 93 of List 1 of the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution, which empowers the Parliament to create criminal laws only concerning matters listed in List 1.
The Petitioners’ Stand
According to the petitioners, the powers bestowed upon the CGST officers, resembling those of police officers and civil courts during investigations, do not align with the classification of the proceedings as an ‘inquiry’ rather than an accusation. This, they argue, denies the summoned individuals the protection guaranteed under Article 20(3) of the Indian Constitution. The contention further states that the officers handling CGST cases are not, in fact, police officers.
A Closer Look at the Jurisdiction
One of the key points raised in the petitions is the jurisdiction of the Parliament. The argument emphasizes that the Parliament has the authority to make criminal laws only on subjects falling under List 1. CGST, being a matter involving taxation, doesn’t strictly fall within the scope of this jurisdiction. This stance raises important questions about the extent of the Parliament’s powers and its interpretation in the context of evolving economic frameworks.
Pending Matters and Compliance
The petitions also bring attention to the preexisting legal battles surrounding the mandatory compliance procedures prescribed under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC). These procedures pertain to investigating offenses under the CGST Act. The petitioners stress the importance of adhering to established legal procedures and highlight their concerns regarding the potential misuse of power without proper due process.
Coercive Action and Seeking Relief
The current petitions find their origins in an investigation initiated by the office of Respondent No.2, pertaining to allegations of GST evasion or non-payment. In light of these circumstances, the petitioners approached the Supreme Court to seek relief from potential coercive actions by the respondents. They sought the quashing of proceedings initiated against them under the CGST Act, asserting that they were not following the legally established procedure laid out in the CrPC.
The Bench and Stay Order
The matters were brought before a bench comprising Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Sudhanshu Dhulia. Notably, the bench stayed any coercive measures against the petitioners until the matter could be thoroughly examined. This stay order reflects the gravity of the issues at hand and highlights the court’s recognition of the potential implications of the CGST Act provisions under scrutiny.
Conclusion
In summary, the recent notice issued by the Supreme Court in response to the writ petitions challenging the constitutional validity of certain provisions of the CGST Act has sparked significant legal discourse. The petitions question the alignment of powers vested in the government under the Act with the constitutional framework. As the legal battle unfolds, it will undoubtedly shape the landscape of taxation and constitutional interpretation in India.