Page 92 - GSTL_14th May 2020_Vol 36_Part 2

194 GST LAW TIMES [ Vol. 36
the bank accounts of the three petitioner companies. She further highlighted that
investigations had been started by the authorities with respect to the companies
that had received the fake input tax credit and new material is being unearthed
in the course of investigations that are presently being pursued by the DGGI.
21. Mrs. Gupta finally submitted that the investigation is a continuing
process against several companies that have issued fake invoices and the recipi-
ent of the same that have availed unauthorised input tax credit. She submits that
out of the estimated 40 crores, Rs. 12 crores have been reversed by the companies
that had received the bogus invoices. According to her, in the absence of the pro-
visional attachment, the money lying in the accounts of the three petitioners
would vanish into thin air. On the legal aspect, she submitted that the GST Act,
2017 provides for 5 years for completion of the investigation, issuance of show
cause notice and adjudication. She placed sub-sections (1), (2), (9) and (10) of Sec-
tion 74 to highlight the above point. She submitted that when the Legislature has
given a period of 4 and half years for issuance of show cause notice, it clearly
contemplated that investigations for such complex fraudulent transactions may
take the aforesaid time. Accordingly, she submitted that Section 83 of the GST
Act, 2017 cannot be read in a manner detrimental to the interest of the Revenue.
She further submitted that the words “every such” in sub-section (2) of Section
83 makes it clear that multiple provisional attachment orders may be issued by
the Revenue, if the need so arises.
22. Before moving directly to answer the legal issue in hand it is ger-
mane to produce few of the relevant provisions of the CGST Act, 2017 and CGST
Rules, 2017.
“Section 67. Power of inspection, search and seizure. - (1) Where the
proper officer, not below the rank of Joint Commissioner, has reasons to be-
lieve that -
(a) a taxable person has suppressed any transaction relating to
supply of goods or services or both or the stock of goods in
hand, or has claimed input tax credit in excess of his entitle-
ment under this Act or has indulged in contravention of any
of the provisions of this Act or the rules made thereunder to
evade tax under this Act; or
(b) any person engaged in the business of transporting goods or
an owner or operator of a warehouse or a godown or any oth-
er place is keeping goods which have escaped payment of tax
or has kept his accounts or goods in such a manner as is likely
to cause evasion of tax payable under this Act,
he may authorise in writing any other officer of central tax to inspect any
places of business of the taxable person or the persons engaged in the busi-
ness of transporting goods or the owner or the operator of warehouse or
godown or any other place.
(2) Where the proper officer, not below the rank of Joint Commissioner,
either pursuant to an inspection carried out under sub-section (1) or other-
wise, has reasons to believe that any goods liable to confiscation or any
documents or books or things, which in his opinion shall be useful for or
relevant to any proceedings under this Act, are secreted in any place, he
may authorise in writing any other officer of central tax to search and seize
or may himself search and seize such goods, documents or books or things :
GST LAW TIMES  14th May 2020  92