FRAUDULENT TRANSACTIONS & OWNERSHIP OF GOODS.

[Sadanand Bulbule]

Circular No. 76/50/2018-GST dated 31/12/2018 issued by the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (GST Policy Wing) reads as under:

6. Who will be considered as the ‘owner of the goods’ for the purposes of section 129(1) of the CGST Act?

It is hereby clarified that if the invoice or any other specified document is accompanying the consignment of goods, then either the consignor or the consignee should be deemed to be the owner. If the invoice or any other specified document is not accompanying the consignment of goods, then in such cases, the proper officer should determine who should be declared as the owner of the goods.

In this regard my understanding is as under:

The clarification being so, whether the concept of deemed ownership of goods can be applied even in respect of fraudulent transactions with manufactured documents for the purpose Section 129(1)(a) of the Act?

If the answer is yes, is it not a bonanza for the fraudsters to seek sympathetic remedy under Section 129(1((a) of the Act whenever caught red handed on investigation and escape from the full penalty under Section 129(1((b) of the Act?

Therefore the intrinsic intent of the said Circular needs to deciphered and if warrants, the surface meaning be redefined by GST Policy Wing confining it to protect the genuine and trusted tax invoice or any other specified documents accompanying the consignment of goods in transit. The core of the transactions should be focussed rather than the mechanical compliance with manufactured documents. In simple words, fraudsters should be kept outside from the purview of Section 129(1)(a) of the Act in the interest of equity. Because the fraudulent transactions are not simple violation of law attracting symbolic and graceful penalty. In any event, the remedy provided under Section 129(1)(a) of the Act should not become worst than decease as far as fraudulent transactions are concerned.

Kindly enlighten me with sagacious suggestions.

AI Summary

Interpretation of GST Circular No. 76/50/2018: Addressing Deemed Ownership and Fraudulent Transactions under Section 129(1) of CGST Act The discussion focuses on the interpretation of GST Circular No. 76/50/2018 regarding the ownership of goods under Section 129(1) of the CGST Act. The issue raised questions whether deemed ownership applies to fraudulent transactions using manufactured documents. Concerns were expressed that fraudsters might exploit this provision to avoid full penalties. Replies suggest that the department can identify culprits and that the law aims to curb tax evasion while ensuring the original owner can reclaim goods or their value. The intention is not to enrich revenue through penalties but to ensure fairness and proper ownership identification.