Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
+ Post an Article
Post a New Article
Title :
0/200 char
Description :
Max 0 char
Category :
Co Author :

In case of Co-Author, You may provide Username as per TMI records

Delete Reply

Are you sure you want to delete your reply beginning with '' ?

Delete Issue

Are you sure you want to delete your Issue titled: '' ?

Articles

Back

All Articles

Advanced Search
Reset Filters
Search By:
Search by Text :
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms
Select Date:
FromTo
Category :
Sort By:
Relevance Date

Recording reason to believe in INS-01 is a pre-requisite to initiate Search

Bimal jain
Tax Authority's Search Invalidated Due to Lack of 'Reasons to Believe' Under Section 67 of CGST Act. The Allahabad High Court ruled that the tax department's failure to provide 'reasons to believe' before initiating a search under Section 67 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, renders the proceedings invalid. In the case involving a technical academy, two search warrants were issued on different dates, raising doubts about their legitimacy. The court found the warrants, especially the one issued after the search, to be invalid and fabricated. Consequently, the entire search and seizure proceedings were quashed, and the tax department was ordered to refund the amount deposited by the petitioner. (AI Summary)

The Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of M/S. EXCELLENT VISION TECHNICAL ACADEMY PVT. LTD. VERSUS STATE OF U.P. AND 5 OTHERS - 2024 (6) TMI 1239 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURTheld that where Revenue department failed to put forward the actual reasons to believe as required under Section 67 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 before initiating search, in such case the entire proceedings is liable to be quashed.

Facts:

M/s. Excellentvision Technical Academy (P.) Ltd. (“the Petitioner”) was searched by the UP GST department on January 4, 2018, subsequently the Department issued two INS-01 (search warrant), on two different dates: one on January 4, 2018 (date of the search) and the another on February 11, 2019.

Subsequently, the tax Department initiated the proceedings by issuing show cause notice dated February 8, 2021 under Section 74 of the Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (“the State GST Act”) and later passed the order dated September 01, 2021.

The Petitioner aggrieved by the search conducted by the tax Department filed writ Petition before the Hon’ble Allahabad High court contending that the tax Department never put forth the reasons to believe for conducting search which is mandatory under Section 67 of the State GST Act.

Further, issuance of two INS-01 on different dates, itself crate doubt on the genuineness of the authorization to the proper officer to conduct the inspection, search and seizure.

The Petitioner further stated that, both the INS-01 does not contain “reasons to believe” by the Joint Commissioner to initiate the proceedings against the Petitioner, therefore, the proceedings initiated under section 67 is totally illegal and liable to be set aside.

Issue:

Whether recording reason to believe in INS-01 is pre-requisite for tax department to initiate the search proceedings?

Held:

The Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in M/S. EXCELLENT VISION TECHNICAL ACADEMY PVT. LTD. VERSUS STATE OF U.P. AND 5 OTHERS - 2024 (6) TMI 1239 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURTheld as under:

  • Noted that, the INS-01 issued on February 11, 2019 is subsequent to the search and is, therefore, an invalid document.
  • Stated that, the first INS-01 was issued on the date of search, was provided to the Petitioner upon the application by the Petitioner. Thus, the document appears to be fabricated and created as an afterthought.
  • Observed the counter affidavit filed by the tax Department and stated that, the tax Department has failed to explain and put forward the actual reasons to believe as required under Section 67 of the State GST Act.
  • Stated that, the entire proceedings that have originated from the illegal search and seizure carried out under Section 67 of theState GST Act have no foot to stand on and accordingly, the entire authorization is liable to be quashed.
  • Further, ordered the Tax Department to refund the amount deposited by the Petitioner in lieu of the order passed under Section 74 of the State GST Act within a period of eight weeks.

(Author can be reached at [email protected])

answers
Sort by
+ Add A New Reply
Hide
+ Add A New Reply
Hide
Recent Articles