Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query..!
Scanned Judgements…!
Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query..!
Scanned Judgements…!
Challenging Search Seizure under GST Act - Main points and insights:
Legality of Search and Seizure Procedures:
Unauthorized or improperly documented searches, such as those lacking prior notice or issued without proper reasons, are challenged as illegal or invalid ["Gaurav Saurav Traders and Contractors VS State of U. P. - Allahabad"], ["MR Steels vs Deputy Commissioner of State Tax (VI) - Telangana"].
Challenges to the Legality of Search:
The legality of search is also scrutinized based on whether the officer conducting the search was authorized and whether the search was conducted within the scope of the powers conferred ["Vigneshwara Transport Company VS Additional Commissioner Of Central Tax - Karnataka"], ["Lovelesh Singhal Prop Shivani Overseas VS Commissioner, Delhi Goods And Services Tax - Delhi"].
Impact of Illegal Search and Seizure:
The distinction is made that procedural violations in search and seizure under GST could lead to quashing of proceedings or the seizure itself, especially if statutory requirements are not met ["Gaurav Saurav Traders and Contractors VS State of U. P. - Allahabad"], ["MR Steels vs Deputy Commissioner of State Tax (VI) - Telangana"].
Penal and Procedural Safeguards:
Analysis and Conclusion:Challenging search and seizure under the GST Act hinges on strict adherence to statutory procedures, including proper authorization, prior notice, and reasons for conduct. Courts have invalidated actions where these safeguards are not followed, emphasizing that powers under Section 67 are drastic and must be exercised judiciously. Evidence obtained unlawfully can be contested, and procedural violations can lead to quashing of proceedings. The Act's procedural safeguards aim to prevent abuse of power, and any deviation from these can be challenged effectively in courts.
References:- ["Vigneshwara Transport Company VS Additional Commissioner Of Central Tax - Karnataka"]- ["Deepak Singhal VS Union Of India - Madhya Pradesh"]- ["Gaurav Saurav Traders and Contractors VS State of U. P. - Allahabad"]- ["Deepak Singhal VS Union of India - Madhya Pradesh"]- ["Kanak Timber House VS Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax - Calcutta"]- ["MD. ANIQUL ISLAM Vs DIRECTORATE OF GOODS AND SERVICES TAX INTELLIGENCE DELHI - Delhi"]- ["RCI INDUSTRIES AND TECHNOLOGIES LTD THROUGH ITS DIRECTOR RAJEEV GUPTA Vs COMMISSIONER DGST DELHI & ORS. - Delhi"]- ["Dhruv Krishan Maggu vs Principal Director General, Dggi (Hqrs.), RK Puram, New Delhi - Delhi"]- ["Vivek Narsaria S/o Raj Kumar Narsaria VS State of Jharkhand - Jharkhand"]- ["Best Crop Science Pvt. Ltd. VS Superintendent, Cgst, Delhi West - Delhi"]- ["MR Steels vs Deputy Commissioner of State Tax (VI) - Telangana"]- ["MR Steels vs Deputy Commissioner of State Tax (VI) - Telangana"]- ["State Of Gujarat VS Paresh Nathalal Chauhan - Supreme Court"]- ["Deepak Khandelwal Proprietor M/s Shri Shyam Metal VS Commissioner of CGST, Delhi West - Delhi"]- ["Lovelesh Singhal Prop Shivani Overseas VS Commissioner, Delhi Goods And Services Tax - Delhi"]- ["Dheeraj Gupta vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh - Madhya Pradesh"]- ["Vinod Chandra Sahay vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh - Madhya Pradesh"]- ["R. C. Infra Digital Solutions Thru. Auth. Representative Mr. Ashish Kumar VS Union Of India - Allahabad"]
In the complex world of GST compliance, businesses often face the daunting prospect of search and seizure operations by tax authorities. A common query arises: how can one challenge search and seizure under the GST Act? This question is particularly pressing for transporters and traders dealing with goods, where improper procedures can lead to significant losses, especially with perishable items. This blog post delves into the legal framework, key court rulings, taxpayer protections, and practical steps to navigate these challenges effectively.
Drawing from landmark cases and statutory provisions, we'll explore how courts balance enforcement powers with fairness, ensuring seizures aren't arbitrary. Whether you're a business owner or legal professional, understanding these nuances can safeguard your rights.
The GST regime empowers authorities to conduct inspections, searches, and seizures under Section 67 of the CGST Act, 2017, which applies to inter-state supplies via Section 20 of the IGST Act, 2017. Chapter XIV of the CGST Act covers inspection, search, seizure, and arrest, with Sections 67 and 68 outlining the powers. Section 20 of the IGST Act, 2017, the provisions of Chapter XIV of GST Act, 2017 which deals with inspection, search, seizure and arrest and power of inspection, search and seizure (Section 67 and 68 of CGST Act, 2017) are applicable to the inter-State supply of goods. Bright Road Logistics VS State of Haryana - 2023 Supreme(P&H) 2699
However, these powers aren't absolute. Seizures require reasons to believe tax evasion or contraventions, and must follow procedural safeguards akin to the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC). Courts consistently emphasize that seizure must adhere to procedural fairness and legal standards under GST law. Somnath Corporation VS State Of Rajasthan - 2022 0 Supreme(Raj) 1852
Failure to comply renders actions illegal, opening doors for challenges via writ petitions.
A pivotal ruling illustrates courts' approach to balancing enforcement and fairness. In a case involving a transport truck loaded with perishable cumin seeds, GST authorities seized the vehicle suspecting violations. The taxpayer challenged this, arguing undue hardship due to perishability.
The court directed release on conditions like bank guarantees and bonds for the full value, stating: The seizure of a transport truck carrying perishable cumin seeds was challenged, and the court directed the release of the goods on specific conditions, such as deposit of bank guarantees and bonds for the full value of the goods. Somnath Corporation VS State Of Rajasthan - 2022 0 Supreme(Raj) 1852 This underscores that courts may direct the release of seized goods under conditions, especially when goods are perishable. Somnath Corporation VS State Of Rajasthan - 2022 0 Supreme(Raj) 1852
Post-release, authorities can proceed with assessment and liability determination, with the taxpayer retaining appeal rights. Post-seizure assessment and liability determination are integral, with rights of appeal safeguarded. Somnath Corporation VS State Of Rajasthan - 2022 0 Supreme(Raj) 1852
Not all items fall under seizure powers. Cash, for instance, is excluded from 'goods' under CGST. In a notable decision, courts quashed the seizure of currency from business premises: The court found that the seizure of cash under Section 67 of the CGST Act was illegal and arbitrary as cash is excluded from the definition of 'goods' and cannot be seized as such. K. M. Food Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Through Its Director Mukesh Kapoor VS Director General Dggi Headquarters, New Delhi - 2024 Supreme(Del) 399 The word 'things' in Section 67(2) of the CGST Act does not include 'money'. K. M. Food Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Through Its Director Mukesh Kapoor VS Director General Dggi Headquarters, New Delhi - 2024 Supreme(Del) 399
This protects legitimate business cash, provided it's accounted for, highlighting the narrow scope of Section 67.
Courts intervene when procedures falter. In cases of police interceptions for GST/Customs violations, jurisdiction is key. Police may act under IPC but must hand over to GST officers. The police had jurisdiction to investigate offences under the Indian Penal Code, but for violations of the Customs Act and AGST Act, the investigation should be handed over to the customs and GST authorities respectively. Sarada Traders VS State of Assam Rep by Commissioner and Secretary to the Govt. of Assam - 2019 Supreme(Gau) 647
Procedural non-compliance, like unrecorded statements under duress, weakens cases. Procedure prescribed under Ss. 67, 69, 74, 134,136, 138 of the GST Act and S.41A of Cr.P.C. for arrest, recording of statement, search and seizure has not been followed. Nitesh Wadhwani VS State Of M. P. - 2020 Supreme(MP) 610 Such lapses supported bail grants in tax evasion probes. Kishore Wadhwani VS State Of Madhya Pradesh - 2020 Supreme(MP) 651
Taxpayers aren't defenseless:- Provisional Release: Seek bonds/superguaranty for perishable goods to avoid spoilage.- Writ Petitions: Approach High Courts for procedural violations.- Appeals: Challenge assessments under GST appeal mechanisms.- Bail in Criminal Cases: Available if procedures like Section 41A CrPC are ignored. Nitesh Wadhwani VS State Of M. P. - 2020 Supreme(MP) 610
The decision demonstrates that the taxpayer’s rights are protected by allowing the release of goods under conditions and by permitting assessment and appeal processes. Somnath Corporation VS State Of Rajasthan - 2022 0 Supreme(Raj) 1852
For GST authorities and taxpayers:- Authorities: GST authorities should ensure strict adherence to procedural safeguards during search and seizure operations. Somnath Corporation VS State Of Rajasthan - 2022 0 Supreme(Raj) 1852- Taxpayers: Document everything; promptly challenge via bonds for perishables. Taxpayers should be aware of their rights to request release under conditions, especially for perishable goods. Somnath Corporation VS State Of Rajasthan - 2022 0 Supreme(Raj) 1852- Both Parties: Maintain transparent records. Both parties should document all procedures and communications to facilitate transparency and fairness. Somnath Corporation VS State Of Rajasthan - 2022 0 Supreme(Raj) 1852
Disclaimer: This post provides general insights based on case law and is not legal advice. Consult a qualified GST professional for your specific situation, as outcomes depend on facts. Laws evolve, so verify current provisions.
References:- Somnath Corporation VS State Of Rajasthan - 2022 0 Supreme(Raj) 1852: Seizure of perishable goods and release conditions.- Bright Road Logistics VS State of Haryana - 2023 Supreme(P&H) 2699: IGST/CGST provisions on search/seizure.- K. M. Food Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Through Its Director Mukesh Kapoor VS Director General Dggi Headquarters, New Delhi - 2024 Supreme(Del) 399: Seizure of cash ruled invalid.- Nitesh Wadhwani VS State Of M. P. - 2020 Supreme(MP) 610, Kishore Wadhwani VS State Of Madhya Pradesh - 2020 Supreme(MP) 651: Procedural lapses in arrests.- Manik Trade Co. VS State of Assam Rep by Commissioner and Secretary to the Govt. Of Assam - 2019 Supreme(Gau) 642, Sarada Traders VS State of Assam Rep by Commissioner and Secretary to the Govt. of Assam - 2019 Supreme(Gau) 647, Samsir Uddin VS State of Assam and Ors Rep. by Commissioner and Secretary To Govt. of Assam, Finance (Taxation) Deptt. , Dispur, Guwahati - 2019 Supreme(Gau) 652: Reasons to believe and jurisdiction.
#GSTLaw, #SearchSeizure, #TaxpayerRights
Therefore, in an appeal filed challenging the block assessment order, it is open to the assessee to contend that this foundation for block assessment is an illegal search. ... Whereas the petitioner submits that in Pooran Mal's case, search and seizure was not ab initio void and the decision is rendered in respect of utilisation of the evidence conducted during an illegal search for the purposes of income tax and not GST. ... It is in that context it was held even if search#H....
GST authorities conducted search and seizure operations while exercising powers under Section 67(2) of GST Act, on the premises of M/s. ... It is further submitted that admittedly in the case at hand, search and seizure operations conducted by GST Authorities under Section 67(2) of GST Act revealed commission of offence which is punishable under Section 132 of GST Act and hence, ....
Case of the petitioner is that the mandatory provision with regard to Section 67 (1) of the Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as the "U.P. GST Act") has not been complied with by the Joint Commissioner while granting the authorization for search and seizure. ... Power of inspection, search and seizure.-(1). ... Upon a perusal of the documents, we find that the authorization for search under the Form GST....
GST authorities conducted search and seizure operations while exercising powers under section 67(2) of GST Act, on the premises of M/s. ... It is further submitted that admittedly in the case at hand, search and seizure perations conducted by GST Authorities under section 67(2) of GST Act revealed commission of offence which is punishable under section 132 of GST Act and hence, #....
It is the petitioners’ case that on/or about 24th March, 2023, a search and seizure procedure was initiated under Section 67 of the GST Act at the petitioners’ registered place of business. ... provisions of the GST Act to seek release of the goods. ... search and seize such goods, documents or things. ... Chakraborty, learned advocate representing the respondents has taken me through the provisions of Section 67(7) of the GST Act. ....
and seizure. ... The words "subject-matter", "proceedings" and "inquiry" have not been defined either under the State GST Act or the Union Territory GST Act or the CGST Act. Therefore, these words have to be interpreted in the context of the aforesaid Acts. ... There was no purpose of issuing Summon under Section 70 of CGST Act, 2017, to appear at 04:30 PM. In fact, this Summon was an afterthought and was a violation of the procedure to be followed by the GS....
R-1 & R-2 under the State GST, and R-4 & R-5 under the Central GST) can take place under Sections 5 and 6 of DGST Act, 2017. ... Documents regarding search and seizure by DGGI Gurugram and Anti Evasion CGST Delhi. iii. ... Under Section 67 of the CGST Act, when an authorized officer carries out an inspection, search and seizure, the same is on the basis of the satisfaction arrived at by the proper officer not below the rank of the Joint Commissioner ....
Section 20 of the IGST Act, 2017, the provisions of Chapter XIV of GST Act, 2017 which deals with inspection, search, seizure and arrest and power of inspection, search and seizure (Section 67 and 68 of CGST Act, 2017) are applicable to the inter-State supply of goods. ... Chapter XIV of the CGST Act, 2017 deals with inspection, search, seizure and arrest. Section 67 of the CGST Act#HL_....
There is a clear distinction brought about in the CGST Act, 2017 in case of inspection, search and seizure of `documents or books or things' in contrast to seizure of `goods'. ... The relevant sub sections of Sections 67 and Section 74 of the CGST Act 2017, read as under: "67. Power of inspection, search and seizure. ... He relies upon Section 67(7) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (hereinafter `CGST Act, 2017') and ....
In the context of the GST Act, the findings are wholly irrelevant. We find that the seizure of cash from the premises of the appellants was wholly uncalled for and unwarranted." 22. ... (10) The provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), relating to search and seizure, shall, so far as may be, apply to search and seizure under this section subject to the modification that sub-section (5) of section 165 of the said Code shall have ... Ltd., in ter....
Initially the offence was also registered under the same Section. Procedure prescribed under Ss. 67, 69, 74, 134,136, 138 of the GST Act and S.41A of Cr.P.C. for arrest, recording of statement, search and seizure has not been followed. The dispute is entirely covered under Section 132 of the G.S.T. Act. The sole basis of their arrest is their statements recorded by the officials, but the same were recorded under threat and pressure and have been retracted immediately.
The sole basis of their arrest is their statements recorded by the officials, but the same were recorded under threat and pressure and have been retracted immediately. Procedure prescribed under Ss. 67, 69, 74, 134,136, 138 of the GST Act and S.41A of Cr.P.C. for arrest, recording of statement, search and seizure has not been followed. Initially the offence was also registered under the same Section. The dispute is entirely covered under Section 132 of the G.S.T. Act.
In view of such specific provision for inspection, search and seizure and the further provisions in the Acts itself providing for the procedure to be followed by the authorities under the GST Act, the refusal of the learned Single Judge in the judgment dated 25.10.2019 to declare the detention and seizure to be illegal, in respect of the offences under the GST Acts would be unsustainable. The core contention of Dr. Ashok Saraf, learned senior counsel for the appellants is that Section 67 of the GST Acts provides for the power of inspection, search and seizure for any claim ....
The core contention of Dr. Ashok Saraf, learned senior counsel for the appellants is that Section 67 of the GST Acts provides for the power of inspection, search and seizure for any claim for input tax credit in excess of the entitlements under the Act or for any contravention of the provisions of the Act or the Rules made thereunder to evade tax. In view of such specific provision for inspection, search and seizure and the further provisions in the Acts itself providing for the procedure to be followed by the authorities under the GST Act, the refusal of the learned Single Judge i....
In view of such specific provision for inspection, search and seizure and the further provisions in the Acts itself providing for the procedure to be followed by the authorities under the GST Act, the refusal of the learned Single Judge in the judgment dated 25.10.2019 to declare the detention and seizure to be illegal, in respect of the offences under the GST Acts would be unsustainable. The core contention of Dr. Ashok Saraf, learned senior counsel for the appellants is that Section 67 of the GST Acts provides for the power of inspection, search and seizure for any claim ....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
