TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
The Income Tax Department and GST Dept share information on the basis of which the other Department Act. However, this Act should not be in haste but on own inquiry. A hasteful action on GST Department’s information has caused some embarrassment for the Income Tax Dept in the case of Vasuki Global Industrial Limited (Formerly Vasuki Tradelink Private Limited) Versus Principal Chief Commissioner Of Income Tax & Ors. - 2025 (10) TMI 1242 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT where it had received information from the GST Department that the petitioner was involved in GST invoice fraud and was availing or passing on fraudulent Input Tax Credit on fake invoices. Based on this information, the Income Tax Department had issued notices under Section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 to various buyers and sellers who had transacted with the petitioner. This resulted in the suppliers of the petitioner stopping their business transactions with the petitioner. To add salt to injury the information received from the GST Department was found to be incorrect and the Income Tax Dept had to withdraw the notices. Hence the Income Tax Dept. was directed by the High Court that in the future, the Income Tax Department will not take any such action on the basis of the information made available on the Insight Portal without proper verification as per the provisions of the Act.
Before issuing a notice under Section 148A(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, it is the responsibility and liability of the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer to verify the information made available on the Insight Portal which suggests that the income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment in the case of the assessee for the relevant Assessment Year. If necessary, the Assessing Officer must conduct an inquiry with prior approval of the specified authority with respect to such information, and only after verification of the information made available to the Assessing Officer, the provisions of Section 148A(1) of the Act shall be invoked.
Similarly, The Bombay High Court in the case of Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-3 Pune Versus Ramelex Private Ltd. - 2025 (10) TMI 808 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT held that the Assessing Officer cannot make additions solely based on general information received from the Sales Tax Department, without proper proof of the transactions being bogus. The AO has to take into Account all documents produced by assessee like purchase bills, ledger accounts, bank payment proofs, etc. to justify the genuineness of the purchases, and also a certificate from its VAT auditor regarding the correct amount of purchases from one of the alleged Hawala dealers, which was duly considered by the CIT(A) and ITAT.
GST Department’s Fake Invoicing Alert should not lead to Income tax Dept notices automatically… Income Tax Dept should conduct own inquiry
Vivek Jalan
Tax officers must independently verify GST fraud alerts before reassessment, following Section 148A inquiry and approvals Courts have held that tax authorities cannot act mechanically on information shared by other departments or portals without independent verification. In a Gujarat High Court case, the Income Tax Department issued reassessment notices based solely on GST fraud alerts, causing business disruption, and later withdrew them when the GST information proved incorrect. The court directed that future action based on Insight Portal data must follow proper verification and inquiry under Section 148A, with necessary approvals. Similarly, the Bombay High Court held that additions cannot rest only on general information from the Sales Tax Department; assessing officers must examine supporting documents such as invoices, ledgers, bank payments, and auditor certificates to establish bogus transactions. (AI Summary)