Page 66 - GSTL_ 28th May 2020_Vol 36_Part 4

512 GST LAW TIMES [ Vol. 36
of both, as may be required, to enter such building or place. It was submitted
that, therefore, assistance of police can be taken only for the limited purpose of
entry into the premises.
8.13 Lastly, it was submitted that a search action is an invasion of the
privacy of an individual, and hence, search must be carried out in a continuous
manner and the Department cannot carry out search action in bits and pieces as
per their convenience.
9. Mr. Mihir Thakore, Learned Counsel for the respondent State au-
thorities, submitted that the right to privacy exists and is recognized under Arti-
cle 21 of the Constitution of India and any infringement of such right has to be
supported by a statutory provision. It was submitted that in this case the over-
stay at the search premises was because the search party was scrutinising the
phone calls recorded in the mobile phone of the mother of the petitioner, as ma-
terial relevant to the search was contained therein. It was submitted that under
sub-section (2) of Section 67 of the GST Acts, the authorized officer if he has “rea-
son to believe” that any goods, documents, books or things are secreted in any
place, he can authorise any officer of central tax/state tax, as the case may be, to
search and seize such goods, documents, books or things. Accordingly, if the of-
ficer so authorised is of the opinion that any information useful or relevant to
any proceedings under that Act is contained in a mobile phone, it is permissible
for him to look into its contents. It was submitted that documents, books or
things would also include a mobile phone and that while a person cannot be
searched, anything that he has, can certainly be seized and hence, there is no in-
firmity in the action of the respondents in seizing the mobile phone of the peti-
tioner’s mother and making a copy thereof.
9.1 Reference was made to the provisions of Section 144 of the GST
Acts which reads thus :
144. Presumption as to documents in certain cases. - Where any docu-
ment -
(i) is produced by any person under this Act or any other law for
the time being in force; or
(ii) has been seized from the custody or control of any person un-
der this Act or any other law for the time being in force; or
(iii) has been received from any place outside India in the course
of any proceedings under this Act or any other law for the
time being in force, and such document is tendered by the
prosecution in evidence against him or any other person who
is tried jointly with him, the court shall -
(a) unless the contrary is proved by such person, presume -
(i) the truth of the contents of such document;
(ii) that the signature and every other part of such
document which purports to be in the handwrit-
ing of any particular person or which the court
may reasonably assume to have been signed by,
or to be in the handwriting of, any particular per-
son, is in that person’s handwriting, and in the
case of a document executed or attested, that it
was executed or attested by the person by whom
it purports to have been so executed or attested;
GST LAW TIMES  28th May 2020  66