M/S UFLIX INDUSTRIES v. THE ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR GENERAL, DIRECTORATE OF REVENUE INTELLIGENCE & ORS.

1. The petitioner has filed the present petition seeking several reliefs including that directions be issued to the respondent to return Demand Drafts aggregating ₹79,00,000/- ( Rupees Seventy Nine Lacs) – Demand Draft bearing No. 178524 dated 10.05.2022 for a sum of ₹25,00,000/-; Demand Draft bearing NO. 178526 dated 10.05.2022 for a sum of ₹29,00,000/-; and a Demand Draft bearing No. 178525 dated 10.05.2022 for an amount of ₹25,00,000/-. According to the petitioner, the said amount was recovered by coercion, without any order determining the said liability or raising any demand. The petitioner claims that the said amount was paid involuntarily.

2. It is admitted that the petitioner (Mr. Gautam R. Barmecha, proprietor carrying on business under the name of M/s Uflix Industries) had appeared before the concerned Officer for recording the statement on 09.05.2022 at 12:31 p.m. The inquiry continued till 11:00 a.m., the next day.

3. Thereafter, Mr. Gautam R. Barmecha was accompanied by one of the officers of the respondent to the bank with which he was maintaining his savings bank account. He was forced to get the said Demand Drafts made. Mr. Gautam R. Barmecha and the concerned officer of the DRI had, thereafter, returned back to the office of the DRI at around 12:30 p.m.

4. There is a serious controversy whether the statements recorded on that date and the payment made were voluntary. It is pointed out that the bank accounts of M/s Uflix Industries were frozen and the said Demand Drafts were made from the personal savings bank account of the proprietor of the petitioner – Mr. Gautam R. Barmecha.

5. Mr. Venkatraman, the learned ASG, submitted that the statements recorded on 09.05.2022 and 10.05.2022 were voluntary. He also pointed out that, subsequently, in the statement recorded on 31.05.2022, Mr. Gautam R. Barmecha admitted that his statements recorded on 09.05.2022 and 10.05.2022 were voluntary.

6. Ms. Jha, the learned counsel for the petitioner, also relies on the statement made on 31.05.2022 inasmuch as the said statement also reflects that the said payments were involuntary.

7. It is stated that a show cause notice has already been issued to the petitioner and the quantum of the amount, if any, that may be due from the petitioner would be determined in the adjudicatory proceedings to be conducted pursuant to the show cause notice.

8. Considering the controversy involved in the present case, the learned ASG, on instructions, states that there would be no difficulty in returning the amounts collected while reserving the rights of the respondents to take any further action in accordance with law, including for protection of revenue and for recovery of any amounts that may be determined as due from the petitioner.

9. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that although a show cause notice has been issued, the petitioner has been unable to answer the same as clear copies of the relied upon documents have not been provided.

10. The learned ASG submits that the legible copies of the relied upon documents will be provided within a period of one week from today and if the petitioner has any particular grievance regarding any document, the learned counsel for the petitioner is at liberty to contact Mr. Harpreet Singh, learned Senior Standing Counsel, and he shall ensure that a legible copy is provided.

11. Ms. Jha submits that the petitioner would be satisfied if the sum recovered from him are refunded. She also states that the petitioner would fully cooperate with the respondents for adjudication of the show cause notice.

12. In view of the above, this Court considers it apposite to dispose of the present petition in the aforesaid terms.

13. The respondent shall forthwith refund the amount of ₹79,00,000/- collected from Mr. Gautam R. Barmecha, by remitting it into his personal savings bank account, from where the amounts were drawn.

14. It is clarified that the respondents are not precluded from taking any other action in accordance with law for preservation of revenue or for recovery of any amount that may be found due from the petitioner.

15. The petitioner shall respond to the show cause notices within a period of three weeks from today. The concerned authority shall adjudicate the show cause notices as expeditiously as possible and, preferably, within a period of four weeks thereafter.