GST Summons Are for Inquiry, Not Detention: Bombay High Court

The Bombay High Court, Aurangabad bench, has clarified that summons issued under Section 70 of the Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST) Act are for the purpose of inquiry and recording of statements. It does not mean that the individual will be detained or taken into custody.

The court has further clarified that under the said section, the GST officials are not required to give a seven-day prior notice before issuing such a summons, and they can directly summon any individual whom they believe it is necessary to get information or documents from during an investigation.

The benches comprised Honourable Justices YG Khobragade and Sandipkumar C Moreover, the present ruling dismissed the writ petition filed by a taxpayer named Kanhaiya Nilambar Jha, where he had prayed for Rs. 10 lakh compensation on the grounds that GST officers had illegally detained him during an investigation in connection with a fake input tax credit (ITC) case.

The court ruled, “When the section is silent in respect of seven days’ notice, it cannot be held that such notice is mandatory.” As per the taxpayer, he was taken from Mumbai to Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar (previously known as Aurangabad) on June 17, 2025, by the GST officials, in the absence of any summons or arrest memo, and held formally on June 21, 2025. He claimed that the tax authorities had violated constitutional safeguards.

Citing an earlier judgement of the Supreme Court of India, the court ruled that investigation authorities must be permitted to carry out enquiries as per the GST law. At the same time, they must follow proper safeguards to prevent any misuse of their powers.

In conclusion, the court could not find any solid evidence of illegal detention as claimed by the petitioner; hence, the court rejected the request for Rs. 10 lakh compensation and dismissed the writ petition. As per the wish of the petitioner, he will be kept at GST Bhavan in Aurangabad; simultaneously, he is permitted to use his four mobile phone handsets.

The tax authorities claimed before the court that the petitioner was just called as a witness during an investigation into tax evasion, and he suo moto attended the questionings between June 17 and June 20. The officials stated that he was later arrested only after the charges against him were confirmed.