Ask Jurishour AI

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
tdb_templates
saswp_reviews
saswp-collections
saswp_rvs_location
tdc-review-email
web-story-font
web-story
googlesitekit_email
tds_locker
tds_email
saswp
mailpoet_page
mailpoet_email
tdcpt_tunes
tdc-review
pronamic_payment
pronamic_gateway
pronamic_pay_subscr
wpcode
HomeNotificationED Can’t Issue Summons To Any Advocate Without Prior Approval Of Director...

ED Can’t Issue Summons To Any Advocate Without Prior Approval Of Director [READ CIRCULAR]

Published on

🚀 Stay Connected With JurisHour

WhatsApp X Telegram

The Directorate of Enforcement has issued the circular on the directive for issuing summons Practitioners/Advocates/Lawyers.

As per the circular the ED cannot issue summons to any advocate without prior approval of the director.

The ED noted that the field formations are issuing summons to legal practitioners/Advocates/Lawyers during the course of money laundering investigation to disclose/produce communications and documents in professional capacity pertaining to their clients.

As per Section 132 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (BSA, 2023) no advocate, shall at any time be permitted, unless with his client’s express consent, to disclose any communication made to him in the course and for the purpose of his service as such advocate, by or on behalf of his client, or to state the contents or condition of any document with which he has become acquainted in the course and for the purpose of his professional service, or to disclose any advice given by him to his client in the course and for the purpose of such service. Provided that nothing in this section shall protect from disclosure of- (a) any such communication made in furtherance of any illegal purpose; (b) any fact observed by any advocate, in the course of his service as such, showing that any crime or fraud has been committed since the commencement of his service. It is immaterial whether the attention of such advocate referred to in the proviso to sub-section (1), was or was not directed to such fact by or on behalf of his client. The obligation stated in this section continues after the professional service has ceased.

In other words, a legal practitioner cannot be compelled to disclose any communication made to him in the course and for the purpose of his professional service as such legal practitioner, by or on behalf of his client unless with his client’s express consent. However, proviso to Section 132 of the BSA, 2023 has carved out certain exceptions.

The circular directed that no summons shall be issued to any advocate in violation of Section 132 of the BSA, 2023. Further, if any summon needs to be issued under the exceptions carved out in proviso to Section 132 of the BSA, 2020, the same shall be issued with the prior approval of the Director, ED.

Read More: Union Finance Minister Chairs CBIC Conclave, Urges Measures to Strengthen Taxpayer Services and Trade Facilitation

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

R. 96(10) Omitted Without Saving Clause: Calcutta High Court Quashes GST SCN and Consequential Orders

The Calcutta High Court has quashed a GST show cause notice issued under Section...

Rs. 97.26 Lakh ITC Demand Raised Through GST Refund Order Without Prior Show-Cause Process Stayed: Madras High Court

The Madras High Court has stayed a ₹97,26,820 input tax credit (ITC) demand raised...

GSTAT Directs Deputy Commissioner to Attend Hearing After Dept. Representatives Fail to Check Taxpayer’s Reply

The GST Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT), Delhi Bench has criticised departmental representatives for appearing at...

More like this

R. 96(10) Omitted Without Saving Clause: Calcutta High Court Quashes GST SCN and Consequential Orders

The Calcutta High Court has quashed a GST show cause notice issued under Section...

Rs. 97.26 Lakh ITC Demand Raised Through GST Refund Order Without Prior Show-Cause Process Stayed: Madras High Court

The Madras High Court has stayed a ₹97,26,820 input tax credit (ITC) demand raised...