- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34722 WP No. 2029 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION NO. 2029 OF 2025 (T-RES) BETWEEN: SRI AVINASH GOYAL AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS S/O TARACHAND GOYAL MANAGING DIRECTOR OF ROLLWELL CONVEYOR PRIVATE LIMITED BRIGADE RUBIX, NO.204, NO.20 HMT WATCH FACTORY ROAD BENGALURU – 560 013. …PETITIONER (BY MS. VEENA J.KAMATH, ADVOCATE FOR SRI JAGADISHCHANDRA KAMATH K., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE ADDITIONAL ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OFFICE OF DIRECTOR GENERAL OF GST INTELLIGENCE VISHAKAPATNAM ZONAL UNIT DOOR NO.28-14-17, SURYA BAGH BESIDE MELODY THEATRE VISHAKAPATNAM – 530 020. Digitally signed by NAGAVENI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34722 WP No. 2029 of 2025 2. THE DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF GST INTELLIGENCE BENGALURU ZONAL UNIT 112, S.P. ENCLAVE ADJACENT TO KARNATAKA BANK K.H. ROAD, BENGALURU – 560 027. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI MADHU N.RAO, ADVOCATE) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS INITIATED BY THE R-1 UNDER SECTION 70 OF THE CGST ACT 2017 BEARING F.NO. AE/MIS/126/2024-GR, J- 0/O ADG-DGGI-ZU-VSKP, CBIC- DIN 202501DSS6000000ED1B DTD. 22.01.2025 AS PER ANNX-F BY ISSUING A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER WRIT AS THIS HON’BLE COURT DEEMS FIT AS IT IS WITHOUT AUTHORITY AND JURISDICTION AND IN VIOLATION OF PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE; DIRECT THE R-1 TO RETURN THE SEIZED DOCUMENTS AFTER MAKING TRUE COPIES OF THE DOCUMENTS SEIZED FROM THE PETITIONER PREMISES AS PER ANNX-B, B1 AND E BY ISSUING A WRIT OF MANDAMUS AND ETC., THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34722 WP No. 2029 of 2025 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA ORAL ORDER The petitioner is before this Court seeking the following prayer: “a) Quash the proceedings initiated by the 1st Respondent under Section 70 of the CGST Act, 2017, bearing F.No.AE/MIS/126/2024-GR, J-O/o ADG-DGGI-ZU-VSKP CBIC DIN 202501DSS6000000ED1B dated 22.01.2025 as per Annexure - F by issuing a Writ in the nature of Certiorari or any other Writ as this Hon'ble Court deems fit as it is without authority and jurisdiction and in violation of principles of natural justice; b) Direct the 1st Respondent to return the seized documents after making true copies of the documents seized from the Petitioner's premises as per Annexure B, B1 and E by issuing a Writ of Mandamus; c) Direct the 1st Respondent to provide specific documents that may be required along with reasons and also consider the Petitioner's representation dated 25.12.2024 at Annexure J1 and permit production of any documents through its authorized representatives in respect of any investigation conducted, in accordance with law by Respondents by issuing a Writ of Mandamus; d) Grant any other relief as may be deemed fit by this Hon'ble Court.” 2. Heard Ms. Veena J. Kamath, learned counsel for Sri Jagadishchandra Kamath K., learned counsel for petitioner - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34722 WP No. 2029 of 2025 and Sri Madhu N. Rao, learned counsel for respondent Nos.1 and 2. 3. The petitioner claims to be the Managing Director of a Company against which, a search and seizure is conducted by the Goods and Services Tax – Intelligence (for short ‘the Authority’). The seizure happens at the office of the petitioner at Vishakapatnam. Panchnama is drawn by seizing several materials. Pursuant to which, a summons comes to be issued on 22.11.2024 under Section 70 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (for short ‘the Act’). Sri Madhu N. Rao, learned counsel appearing for the respondents would now add that this summons is fifth in line. The petitioner does not appear. Another summons, impugned, in the subject petition, is issued to the petitioner to appear at the Bangalore office on 23.01.2025. Even then, the petitioner has not appeared. The petitioner is now wanting to know what is the case against him for him to appear and answer the summons. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would stress upon the fact that the petitioner is not aware as to why he is being summoned repeatedly, while the petitioner does not - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34722 WP No. 2029 of 2025 appear before the Officer even once. Therefore, it is for the petitioner to appear before the Authority. 5. Sri Madhu N. Rao, learned counsel for respondents submits that if the petitioner would appear, in terms of law, what the petitioner would need, would be furnished. He would qualify his statement that information to the petitioner would be furnished, subject to the conditions stipulated, under Section 67(5) of the Act. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he may be taken into custody, at the time, he appears before the Authority for answering the summons. If that be so, it is always open to the petitioner to seek protective orders before the appropriate forum. 7. Therefore, keeping all contentions open, I deem it appropriate, directing the petitioner to appear before the first respondent – Additional Assistant Director, Vishakapatnam and answer the summons, on 22.09.2025 at 03.00 p.m. The Authority shall bear in mind the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:34722 WP No. 2029 of 2025 respondents, to regulate its procedure thereafter. Liberty is reserved to the petitioner to knock at the doors of the appropriate fora in the event of need. 8. With the aforesaid observations and directions, writ petition stands disposed. Ordered accordingly. Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE NVJ List No.: 1 Sl No.: 4 CT:SS