TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (9) TMI 736
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ion through reliable sources that some persons are indulging in tax evasion on supply of coke, the Joint Director, DGGI Guwahati Zonal Unit, authorized a search of the premises of the petitioner. 4. During search operation, conducted on 19.08.2025, in the premises of the petitioner, some mobile phones and documents were seized, the details of which are contained in GST INS-02 no DIN No. was provided in the INS 02 relating to search and seizure which is mandatorily required under the provisions of law. The petitioner was summoned by the officials of the DGGI under Section 70 of the CGST Act, 2017 5. It is alleged that the petitioner is a member of a syndicate which provides fake invoices to coal suppliers to enable them to supply of coal from Assam to Bihar without payment of GST & Coal Cess. It is also alleged that the petitioner provides fake invoices in the name of non-existing firms to these coal traders and E-way bills were shown to have been issued by these fake firms for smooth movement of coal without payment of GST. 6. It is also alleged that the tax evasion, by taking recourse of issuance of such E-way bills, was found to the tune of Rs. 6.93 Crore during the peri....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....bscond or disobey summons or has failed to co-operate in the investigation, however, in the instant case, the petitioner has complied with the summons issued to him and has fully co-operated in the investigation. As such, there was no occasion for the officials of DGGI to arrest the petitioner in connection with the above mentioned case. 11. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the summons were issued to him to tender statements and to submit oral/documentary evidence and the petitioner has done so after appearing before the Senior Intelligence Officer, DGGI in pursuant to the summons. The learned counsel for the petitioner has also submitted that though Section 69 of the CGST Act, 2017 provides for the power to arrest and empowers the commissioner to arrest a person and if he has reason to believe that a person has committed any offence specified in clause (a) or clause (b) or clause (c) or clause (d) of sub-section (1) of section 132 which is punishable under clause (i) or (ii) of sub-section (1), or sub-section (2) of the said section, however, the existence of power to arrest and necessity to exercise such powers are two different things. 12. She submits th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....g an arrest formal order of assessment of the quantum of evasion of tax is not necessary if the department is certain that it is a case of offence under clauses (a) to (d) as well as clause (i) of sub-section (1) to Section 132 of the GST Act, and the amount of tax evaded, etc. falls within clause (i) of sub-section (1) of Section 132 of the GST Act. In support of the submission, the learned standing counsel has also cited the ruling of the Apex Court in the case of "Radhika Agarwal Vs. Union of India And Ors ." (supra). 19. The learned standing counsel for the DGGI has also submitted that in this case the offence involved is relating to evasion of tax of enormous quantity and such a case involving economic offence constitutes a class apart and needs to be viewed with a different approach in the matter of bail. He submits that the economic offence having deep-rooted conspiracies and involving huge loss to public funds needs to be viewed seriously and considered as grave offence affecting the economy of the country as a whole and thereby posing serious threat to financial health of the country. 20. He submits that while granting bail in such cases Court has to keep in mind the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n this case against the petitioner is imprisonment for 5(five) years only as well as with fine. Thus, as per the guidelines of the Apex Court, in the case of "Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar " (supra) the necessity of issuance of notice under Section 35 (3) BNSS, 2023 was there in this case. If the notices were to be dispensed with, it was incumbent on the part of the arresting authority to mention the reason for arriving at the satisfaction that there exists any of the conditions as mentioned in Clause (a) to Clause (e) of Section 35 (1) (b) (ii) of the BNSS, 2023 in this case. 26. Though, in this case, in the memo of authorization for arrest of the petitioner issued by the Additional Director General of DGGI, it has been stated that the petitioner may influence witnesses and tamper with the evidence. However, on what basis such a conclusion has been drawn by the Additional Director General, DGGI has not been stated in writing as is the mandate of Section 35 (1) (b) (ii) of the BNSS, 2023. 27. In the case of "Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar " (supra), the Apex Court has while laying down guidelines which are required to be followed before a person may be arrested in case inv....