The Patna High Court has dismissed a writ petition filed by a construction company challenging multiple summons and notices issued by GST authorities and imposed the cost of Rs. 25,000, holding that the summons are legally valid and interference at the investigation stage would obstruct the ongoing inquiry.

The bench of Justice Rajeev Ranjan Prasad and Justice Smt. Soni Shrivastava has observed that the summons were part of an ongoing investigation into alleged fake ITC claims. The authorities were acting within their statutory powers. Judicial interference at this preliminary stage would disrupt the investigation process.

The petitioner approached the Court seeking quashing of multiple summons issued by different GST authorities, alleging violation of Section 6(2) of the Central and Bihar Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and relevant CBIC circulars. The petitioner also sought protection against coercive recovery actions during the pendency of proceedings. 

The petitioner, a registered company under the GST regime, was subjected to several summons and notices over a period of time relating to its supply transactions and Input Tax Credit (ITC) claims. It contended that repeated issuance of summons by multiple authorities on the same subject matter was improper and contrary to statutory provisions. 

The dispute arose in the backdrop of tax proceedings initiated under Section 74 of the CGST Act, involving alleged excess availment of ITC based on discrepancies between GSTR-3B and GSTR-2B returns. For the period April 2023 to March 2024, the tax demand was computed at approximately ₹34.77 lakh, which along with interest and penalty rose to over ₹71.21 lakh. 

Additionally, for the subsequent period 2024–25, a tax liability of ₹87.08 lakh was determined, escalating to ₹1.75 crore including interest and penalty. The authorities had also issued show cause notices and passed orders confirming the demands under Section 74. 

Parallel to the assessment proceedings, the Directorate General of GST Intelligence (DGGI) initiated an inquiry into alleged availment of fake ITC. Summons were issued under Section 70 of the CGST Act, requiring the petitioner’s director to appear and produce documents such as purchase ledgers, invoices, and bank records dating back to July 2017. 

The petitioner challenged these summons, arguing that multiple authorities were simultaneously exercising jurisdiction, thereby violating statutory safeguards.

The High Court, after examining the summons, held that they were issued by competent officers under Section 70 of the CGST Act, which empowers authorities to summon any person for evidence or document production in the course of an inquiry, akin to powers vested in a civil court. 

The bench categorically noted that there was no ground to interfere with the summons, as doing so would amount to “scuttling the ongoing inquiry.” 

Finding no merit in the petitioner’s arguments, the Court dismissed the writ petition and imposed a cost of Rs. 25,000 on the petitioner, directing that the amount be paid to the Patna High Court Legal Services Committee within one month. 

Case Details

Case Title: Morlatis Engineering and Construction Private Limited Versus Union of India

Citation: JURISHOUR-1088-HC-2026(PAT) 

Case No.: Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.809 of 2026

Date: 23-04-2026

Counsel For Petitioner: Sadashiv Tiwari, Advocate

Counsel For Respondent: Vikas Kumar

Read More: Mere Deposit in Electronic Ledger Not GST Payment: Andhra Pradesh HC Quashes Composite Order