{"id":7502,"date":"2022-06-15T11:26:10","date_gmt":"2022-06-15T10:26:10","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.klickongstworld.com\/blog\/?p=7502"},"modified":"2022-06-15T11:29:30","modified_gmt":"2022-06-15T10:29:30","slug":"there-should-be-reason-to-believe-for-exercising-power-under-rule-86a-of-the-cgst-rules-p-h-high-court","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.klickongstworld.com\/blog\/there-should-be-reason-to-believe-for-exercising-power-under-rule-86a-of-the-cgst-rules-p-h-high-court\/","title":{"rendered":"There should be reason to believe for exercising power under Rule 86A of the CGST Rules &#8211; P &#038; H High Court"},"content":{"rendered":"<p align=\"justify\"><strong>The&nbsp;Punjab and Haryana  High Court&nbsp;bench of&nbsp;Justices Tejinder Singh Dhindsa and Pankaj  Jain&nbsp;has&nbsp;held that there should be reason to believe that petitioner  is guilty of fraudulent transaction or is ineligible under Section 16 of the  CGST Act for exercising power under Rule 86A of the CGST Rules and a speaking  order has to be self-sustainable.<\/strong><\/p>\n<p align=\"justify\"><strong>1. Petitioner : <\/strong>Rajnandini Metal Ltd.<\/p>\n<p align=\"justify\"><strong>2. Respondents : <\/strong>Union of India and others<br \/>\n  <strong><\/strong><br \/>\n  <strong>3. Appeal Type\/ No. : <\/strong>CWP No.26661 of 2021  (O&amp;M)<strong> <\/strong><\/p>\n<p align=\"justify\"><strong>4. CORAM : <\/strong>1. HON&#8217;BLE <strong>Justices Tejinder Singh Dhindsa, 2<\/strong>. HON&#8217;BLE Justice <strong>Pankaj  Jain<\/strong> <\/p>\n<p align=\"justify\"><strong>5. Council For Petitioners<\/strong> : Mr. Jagmohan Bansal, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr.  Naveen Bindal, Advocate and Mr. Aman Garg, Advocate<\/p>\n<p align=\"justify\"><strong>6. Council For Respondents<\/strong> : Mr. Anshuman Chopra, Sr. Standing Counsel<\/p>\n<p align=\"justify\"><strong>7. Date of pronouncement <\/strong>: 31.05.2022 <\/p>\n<p align=\"justify\"><strong>8. Facts :<\/strong> The petitioner, a Public  Limited Company is engaged in manufacturing of copper wire rod and submersible  winding wire and is registered under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act,  2017. As per the petitioner, respondents blocked Input Tax Credit amounting to  Rs.1.9 Crore lying in Electronic Credit Ledger on 2nd of September, 2021. The  petitioner filed representations objecting to such action of the respondents  which remained undecided.<\/p>\n<p align=\"justify\">The petitioner was  constrained to approach this court by way of CWP No.23917 of 2021 which was  decided vide the following order dated 6th of December, 2021 :- <\/p>\n<p align=\"justify\">&#8220;We find that by this  petition the petitioner is aggrieved of the action taken by the respondents in  blocking the Input Tax Credit of the petitioner. We further find that by way of  representation dated 10.11.2021 (Annexure P-14), the petitioner has raised a  grievance before respondent No.2 and had objected to the blocking of the Input  Tax Credit. <\/p>\n<p align=\"justify\">In the circumstances, we  deem it appropriate to dispose of this petition with a direction to respondent  No.2 to decide the said representation in accordance with law by passing a  speaking order thereon within a period of seven days from the date of receipt  of certified copy of this order. <\/p>\n<p align=\"justify\">Ordered accordingly. For  this purpose, the petitioner is directed to appear before respondent No.2 on  10.12.2021 at 10:00 am or on any other date on which the said authority may  require its appearance.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p align=\"justify\">The petitioner submitted a  detailed written submission on 10th of December, 2021 in support of his  representation. Respondent vide order dated 17th December, 2021 rejected the representation  of the petitioner seeking unblocking of its Input Tax Credit.<\/p>\n<p align=\"justify\">the petitioner submits that  as per the impugned order the basis for initiating action against the  petitioner is a communication received from Delhi North Commissionerate, as per  which one of the suppliers of the petitioner is found to be non-existing. He  submits that the said supplier is one M\/s Bhagwati Metals. <\/p>\n<p align=\"justify\">He submits that Show Cause  Notice for cancellation of registration was issued to M\/s Bhagwati Metals on  5th February, 2021. The same was however dropped vide order dated 23rd  February, 2021 and the suspension of registration of said M\/s Bhagwati Metals  was revoked by the said communication which is placed on record as Annexure  P-20. <\/p>\n<p align=\"justify\">His contention is thus that  once the very basis of proceeding against the petitioner stands withdrawn by  the respondents themselves and that too on 23rd of February, 2021, there was no  reason to block the Input Tax Credit of the petitioner in September, 2021 and,  thus, the impugned order dated 17th of December, 2021 deserves to be set aside.<\/p>\n<p align=\"justify\">He further submits that the  intent and purport of Rule 86A is to secure interest of revenue and it is sort  of preventive measure. The petitioner is a running manufacturing unit having  turn-over running into multiple Crores, thus there is no possibility of fly by  night. The interest of revenue is always secured. The mis-appropriation or  fraud, if any has been committed by suppliers of the petitioner for which  petitioner cannot be deprived from his valuable right of ITC. The denial of ITC  is violative of Article 19(1)(g) and Article 21 of the Constitution of India.<\/p>\n<p align=\"justify\">Ld. Senior Standing Counsel  for the respondents contended that though the proceedings against M\/s Bhagwati  Metals initiated vide Show Cause Notice dated 5th of February, 2021 were  dropped vide order dated 23rd February, 2021 (Annexure P-20) however, on 1st  July, 2021, the proceedings against the said M\/s Bhagwati Metals were again  initiated and the GSTIN was thereafter cancelled on 27th of July, 2021. <\/p>\n<p align=\"justify\">He further submits that the  reason for initiating proceedings against the petitioner has been clearly  spelled out in Para No.4 of the additional affidavit filed today.<\/p>\n<p align=\"justify\"><strong>9. Nature of Issue : <\/strong><strong>Conditions of  use of amount available in electronic credit ledger<\/strong><strong><u> <\/u><\/strong><\/p>\n<p align=\"justify\"><strong>10. Industry : Not industry specific<\/strong> <\/p>\n<p align=\"justify\"><strong>11. Held :<\/strong> From bare perusal of the  aforesaid provision, it is evident that the power under Rule 86A of the CGST  Rules is exercised where the prescribed officer has reason to believe that  credit of input tax available in the Electronic Credit Ledger has been fraudulently  availed or the assessee is ineligible. The exercise vested in the prescribed  Authority is subject to a satisfaction recorded by the said Authority and  forming opinion to the effect that the Credit Ledger has been fraudulently  availed or the assessee is ineligible in the situations as prescribed under the  Rule itself.<\/p>\n<p align=\"justify\">Rule 86A undoubtedly could  be said to have conferred drastic powers upon the proper officers if they have  reason to believe that the activities or invoices are suspicious. The Rule 86A  is based on &quot;reason to believe&quot;. &quot;Reason to believe&quot; must  have a rational connection with or relevant bearing on the formation of the  belief. It is a subjective term and can be interpreted differently by different individuals.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p align=\"justify\">The Hon&#8217;ble Court finds  that the reason to invoke the power conferred under Rule 86A of CGST Rules  against the petitioner is an intelligence report received from Principal Chief  Commissioner, Central Excise and Central Tax, Vadodara Zone regarding a racket  of firms indulging in fake judicial and passing of illicit ITC. <\/p>\n<p align=\"justify\">The Hon&#8217;ble Court observed  that Merely by recording that some investigation is going-on a drastic  far-reaching action under Rule 86A of the CGST Rules cannot be sustained. There  is no reason recorded by the Authority for exercising power under Rule 86A of  the CGST Act, 2017 which would show independent application of mind that can  constitute reasons to believe which is sine qua non for exercising power under  Rule 86A of the CGST Rules. <\/p>\n<p align=\"justify\">The court also observed that It is trite law that a  speaking order has to be self-sustainable and respondents at this stage cannot  be allowed to justify the same by adding reasons to it by filing additional  affidavits. From the reading of the order it is evident that it is bereft of  any material or &#8216;reason to believe&#8217; that the petitioner is guilty of fraudulent  transaction or is ineligible under Section 16 of the CGST Act.<\/p>\n<p align=\"justify\">Consequently, the present  writ petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 17th December, 2021  (Annexure P-18) is set aside.<\/p>\n<p align=\"justify\">Needless to say that it  shall be open to the respondents to proceed against the petitioner in case any  incriminating material is found during investigation which can form basis of  independent opinion as contemplated under the Act.<\/p>\n<p align=\"justify\"><strong>12. In favour of :<\/strong> Petitioner <\/p>\n<p align=\"justify\"><strong>13. Case Law Refereces : 1. <\/strong>M\/s New Nalbandh Traders  vs. State of Gujarat and 2 other&#8217; (R\/Special Civil Application No.17202 of 2021<\/p>\n<p align=\"justify\"><strong>14. Relevant Act \/ Rules\/ Forms : 1. <\/strong>Rule 86A of the CGST Rules<\/p>\n<p align=\"justify\"><strong>15.  Database Citation : <a href=\"https:\/\/klickongstworld.com\/uploads\/Referencer\/1655288021.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">HC-GW-400-2022-PJ<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>2022\/06\/punjab.jpg<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":7504,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[5],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.klickongstworld.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7502"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.klickongstworld.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.klickongstworld.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.klickongstworld.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.klickongstworld.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=7502"}],"version-history":[{"count":5,"href":"https:\/\/www.klickongstworld.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7502\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":7509,"href":"https:\/\/www.klickongstworld.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7502\/revisions\/7509"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.klickongstworld.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/7504"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.klickongstworld.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=7502"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.klickongstworld.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=7502"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.klickongstworld.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=7502"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}