Punjab & Haryana HC Grants Bail To Two Accused In ₹197 Cr. GST Fraud Case, Holds Allegations Need Trial

The Punjab and Haryana High Court on 29 July granted regular bail to two accused in a Goods and Services Tax (GST) fraud case involving an alleged loss of around Rs. 197.39 crore to the government exchequer, holding that the allegations would have to be tested at trial where the case was largely based on documentary and electronic evidence and the prosecution witnesses were government officials. Justice Shalini Singh Nagpal passed the order in petitions arising from a complaint filed by the...

Rule 96(10) CGST Rules | Supreme Court Says Deleted Restriction On IGST Refunds Cannot Apply To Claims Pending On Omission

The Supreme Court has ruled in favour of exporters seeking refunds of integrated tax paid on exports, holding that a restriction that had earlier prevented some of them from claiming such refunds cannot be applied to their cases if the refund proceedings were pending when the restriction was removed.The restriction was contained in Rule 96(10) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017. Before it was omitted on October 8, 2024, the rule restricted refunds of integrated tax paid on exports...

GST Search Grievance Cannot Invoke Criminal Jurisdiction Under Section 528 BNSS: Madras High Court

The Madras High Court on 4 August held that a grievance concerning search or inspection by Goods and Services Tax (GST) authorities cannot be brought within the scope of Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), merely because tax officials are empowered to conduct search and seizure while following criminal procedure. Justice D. Bharatha Chakravarthy declined to entertain the petition filed by B. Rajkumar, who carries on business as Maharaja Jewellers in Chennai, seeking a...

Director Cannot Be Prosecuted For Company's GST Offence Without Arraigning It: Punjab & Haryana High Court

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has held that a director cannot be prosecuted for a company's GST offence without the company itself being arraigned as an accused. It quashed the criminal complaint against Manoj Bansal, a director of Nikita Industries Pvt. Ltd.Justice Shalini Singh Nagpal observed, “In the absence of M/s NIPL, being arraigned as an accused, the complaint against petitioner, a Director of the Company would not be maintainable. Unless the company is prosecuted, no vicarious...

Delhi High Court Orders Banks To De-freeze Provisional GST Attachments After 1 Year Unless Fresh Order Served

The Delhi High Court has directed all banks and financial institutions to de-freeze bank accounts provisionally attached under Section 83 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (CGST Act), upon the expiry of one year from the date of attachment, unless a fresh attachment order is issued in accordance with law.The Division Bench of Justices Anil Kshetrapal and Shail Jain also directed the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) to issue a circular to all scheduled banks and financial institutions to...

Delhi High Court Says Admissibility Of Electronic Evidence In GST Dispute Must Be Decided By Appellate Authority

The Delhi High Court has refused to entertain a writ petition challenging a GST demand on the ground that it was based on inadmissible third-party electronic evidence, holding that questions relating to the admissibility, authenticity, and evidentiary value of electronic records are matters to be examined by the statutory appellate authority and not in writ jurisdiction.The Division Bench of Justices Anil Kshetrapal and Shail Jain dismissed a petition challenging an order passed under Section 74...

Delhi High Court Refuses To Entertain Challenge To CGST Act Provision Governing Provisional Release Of Seized Goods

The Delhi High Court has declined to interfere with a writ petition challenging the constitutional validity of Section 67(6) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, which governs the provisional release of goods seized during search proceedings.The Division Bench of Justices Anil Kshetrapal and Shail Jain observed that a petitioner questioning the validity of a statutory provision must establish that it infringes a constitutional mandate.Petitioner had contended that the expression "on...

Madras High Court Expands GST Search Safeguards, Requires DIN Compliance And Voluntary Payments

On 5 August, the Madras High Court laid down additional safeguards governing GST searches, including requirements relating to search authorisation, Document Identification Numbers (DIN) and voluntary payments under the GST law. Justice G.R. Swaminathan while allowing a writ petition filed by Bhima Enterprises, a jewellery dealer, held that Goods and Services Tax (GST) officers cannot recover tax during search proceedings and that any payment made before issuance of a show cause...

Rajasthan High Court Rejects Second Bail Plea In ₹48 Crore GST Evasion Case

The Rajasthan High Court has rejected a second bail application filed by a man accused of being the kingpin of an alleged ₹48.41 crore GST evasion syndicate, ruling that bail granted to a co-accused cannot by itself entitle another accused to the same relief. Justice Praveer Bhatnagar observed, "It is a settled proposition of law that parity, by itself, is not the sole or determinative ground for grant of bail as while considering the plea of parity, the court is required to independently...

Gauhati High Court Says How GST Proceedings Are to Be Initiated Can't Be Decided in Writ Petition

The Gauhati High Court has ruled that a writ petition is not the appropriate forum to decide whether GST proceedings should be initiated under the normal recovery provisions or the fraud-related provisions of the CGST Act, as that issue requires factual adjudication by the proper officer.Single Judge Justice Devashis Baruah observed that whether a taxpayer committed fraud, made a wilful misstatement or suppressed facts to evade tax can only be determined after examining the facts and, therefore,...

GST Department Cannot Retain Seized Records After Withdrawing Search Authorisation: Madras High Court

On 5 August, the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court held that the GST Department cannot retain files and documents seized during an inspection once it withdraws the search authorisation under which the seizure was made, and directed the immediate return of all records taken from a jewellery dealer. A Bench of Justice G.R. Swaminathan allowed the writ petition filed by Bhima Enterprises and noted that the Department lost its statutory authority to retain the seized material after withdrawing...

Natural Justice Can't Be 'Sheet Anchor' To Bypass GST Appeal Remedy: Bombay High Court

The Bombay High court has ruled that a taxpayer cannot bypass the statutory appellate remedy under the GST law and directly invoke writ jurisdiction merely by alleging a violation of the principles of natural justice.Holding that such pleas must be supported by specific facts, the court observed, "Taking refuge under natural justice in every case, as a sheet anchor would not justify filing of a Writ Petition under Art. 226, sans justification in the manner the law mandates. This more...