HomeGSTRole Of Police Investigation In GST Evasion? Allahabad High Court Grants Interim...

Role Of Police Investigation In GST Evasion? Allahabad High Court Grants Interim Protection to Accused

Published on

🚀 Stay Connected With JurisHour

WhatsApp X Telegram

In the overlap between tax laws and criminal statutes, the Allahabad High Court has granted interim protection from arrest to an accused, Mohammad Kadir alias Kadir alias Qadir implicated in an alleged Goods and Services Tax (GST) evasion case, while also raising important legal questions on the role of police in GST investigations.

The Bench of Justice J.J. Munir and Justice Tarun Saxena has directed that no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioner and ordered that the petitioner shall not be arrested. The case involves offences under Sections 318(4), 336(3), 338, 340(2), and 61(2) of the BNS. The matter is listed for further hearing on May 6, 2026

The petitioner contended that offences relating to GST evasion are specifically governed by Section 132 of the Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, which provides a complete mechanism for inspection, search, seizure, and arrest. It was argued that only GST authorities are empowered to investigate such offences.

Taking note of this submission, the Court observed prima facie that GST legislation is a special law, and once a statute provides a complete framework for investigation and enforcement, the jurisdiction of police under general criminal laws like the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 may stand excluded. 

The prosecution case alleged that a bogus firm was used to fraudulently avail input tax credit (ITC), and that the said firm had been transferred to the petitioner. However, the Court noted that the petitioner is not the owner of the firm accused of ITC fraud; His implication is based solely on the statement of an accomplice; and there is no material evidence establishing that the bogus firm was actually sold to him

The Court termed the allegation against the petitioner as “incredible” at this stage. 

The Court also issued notice to the respondents and granted them two weeks’ time to file counter affidavits. 

To ensure prompt enforcement, the Court directed the Registrar (Compliance) to communicate the order within 48 hours to: Superintendent of Police, Bijnor; Station House Officer, Police Station Sherkot; and Deputy Commissioner, GST / State Tax Officer, Dhampur.

Case Details

Case Title: Mohammad Kadir alias Kadir alias Qadir Versus State of UP

Case No.: Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. – 8449 Of 2026

Date: 21/04/2026

Counsel For  Petitioner: Abu Bakht

Counsel For Respondent: G.A.

Read More: GST Return Filers Accused of Creating Fake Firms, Bogus Invoices Denied Bail: Allahabad High Court

Mariya Paliwala
Mariya Paliwalahttps://www.jurishour.in/
Mariya is the Senior Editor at Juris Hour. She has 7+ years of experience on covering tax litigation stories from the Supreme Court, High Courts and various tribunals including CESTAT, ITAT, NCLAT, NCLT, etc. Mariya graduated from MLSU Law College, Udaipur (Raj.) with B.A.LL.B. and also holds an LL.M. She started her career as a freelance tax reporter in the leading online legal news companies.

Latest articles

Person Named in Warrant, Not Premises Owner, Is ‘Searched Person’ Under Income Tax Act: Karnataka HC

The Karnataka High Court held that a search under Section 132 is fundamentally person-centric...

Supreme Court Upholds Deer Translocation from Delhi’s A.N. Jha Deer Park, Mandates Scientific Protocols and Welfare Safeguards

The Supreme Court of India has upheld the decision to translocate surplus deer from...

DDT vs DTAA: Can Dividend Distribution Tax on Companies Be Reduced Using Treaty Rates? Bombay High Court Says No

The Bombay High Court has delivered a significant ruling clarifying the legal position on...

Affiliation Fees Not Taxable Under GST: Bombay High Court Quashes Rs. 16.90 Crore GST Demand on University of Mumbai

The Bombay High Court has set aside a GST demand of over Rs. 16.90...

More like this

Person Named in Warrant, Not Premises Owner, Is ‘Searched Person’ Under Income Tax Act: Karnataka HC

The Karnataka High Court held that a search under Section 132 is fundamentally person-centric...

Supreme Court Upholds Deer Translocation from Delhi’s A.N. Jha Deer Park, Mandates Scientific Protocols and Welfare Safeguards

The Supreme Court of India has upheld the decision to translocate surplus deer from...

DDT vs DTAA: Can Dividend Distribution Tax on Companies Be Reduced Using Treaty Rates? Bombay High Court Says No

The Bombay High Court has delivered a significant ruling clarifying the legal position on...