The Supreme Court Bench of Justices Sanjiv Khanna, MM Sundresh, and Bela M Trivedi made several critical observations regarding the powers and procedures related to arrests by GST (Goods and Services Tax) officers recently. The context of these observations arose during the hearing of petitions challenging penal provisions across various acts.
Read More: Supreme Court hears Petition against Penal Provisions under Customs, Excise and GST Laws
One of the key points discussed was the necessity for GST officers to have substantial and verifiable evidence before making an arrest, rather than relying solely on suspicion, reported LiveLaw.
ASG (Additional Solicitor General) SV Raju represented the respondent authorities and presented arguments during the hearing. One of the legal references made was to Article 20(3) of the Constitution, which safeguards individuals against self-incrimination. ASG Raju highlighted that a formal accusation is a prerequisite for the application of this constitutional provision.
Additionally, ASG Raju pointed out that Section 25 of the Evidence Act, which pertains to confessions made to police officers, does not apply to customs officers as they are not categorized under the definition of police officers.
The legal discourse extended to the applicability of certain provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) to customs officers. ASG Raju emphasized the unique powers granted to customs officers under the Customs Act, including the requirement for investigation permission from the Commissioner rather than a Magistrate.
Turning to GST officers, ASG Raju argued that GST Officers are not to be considered as police officers and that the GST Act specifically excludes the application of Chapter XII of the CrPC to them.
A significant part of the discussion revolved around the absence of private complainants under the GST Act and the importance of having concrete and verifiable material before initiating arrests. Justice Khanna stressed the significance of basing conclusions on evidence rather than mere suspicion before taking any coercive action.
ASG Raju concurred with this view, emphasizing that while the reason to believe under Section 69 of the GST Act does not necessarily arise from an adjudication process, it must be based on verifiable material and certified by a Magistrate.
The Supreme Court scheduled the next hearing on this matter for May 15, indicating the continued interest and attention given to the nuanced legal aspects surrounding GST and customs officers’ powers of arrest and investigation.
Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
