GST Prosecution & Compounding of Offences u/s 132 Guide

In recent years, tax administration under the Goods and Services Tax (GST) framework across Chhattisgarh and Odisha has shifted noticeably from routine assessment notices to aggressive criminal enforcement. Business owners, industrial plant operators in the Urla, Bhanpuri, and Siltara industrial belts of Raipur, steel rerolling millers in Durg-Bhilai, civil infrastructure contractors in Korba and Jharsuguda, and rice millers in Kalahandi, Jayapatna, and Sambalpur are increasingly facing coercive action from the Directorate General of GST Intelligence (DGGI) Zonal Units and State Tax Enforcement Wings.

A critical distinction that taxpayers and corporate boards often miss is the fundamental divide between civil tax determination and criminal prosecution:

• Civil Tax Determination (Section 73 / Section 74 / Section 74A): Focuses on recovery of unpaid tax, interest under Section 50, and administrative monetary penalties. It operates on the principle of preponderance of probabilities and civil adjudication.
• Criminal Prosecution (Section 132): Invokes criminal sanctions, powers of arrest under Section 69, police-style custodial interrogation, and trial before a Judicial Magistrate. It requires proof beyond reasonable doubt regarding mens rea (guilty mind) and deliberate intent to defraud the revenue.

In our practice at Raipur and Kalahandi, we routinely observe that routine business disputes—such as delayed ITC reconciliation due to vendor default, rate interpretation disputes on sub-contracts, or temporary cash flow delays—are sometimes wrongfully painted with the brush of criminal fraud during search operations under Section 67. Understanding the exact statutory boundary of Section 132, the mechanics of compounding under Section 138, and procedural remedies under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) (which replaced the CrPC from July 1, 2024) is essential to protect business promoters and directors from unwarranted arrest and criminal exposure.

---

Practitioner Advisory: For professional assistance with compliance requirements, consult our specialized team for GST notices & appeals and GST advisory services.

1. Statutory Breakdown of Section 132: GST Offences & Monetary Thresholds

`

Section 132 of the Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST) Act, 2017 specifies twelve distinct categories of criminal offences. Following statutory decriminalization amendments introduced by the Finance Act, 2023, the legislature raised monetary thresholds for criminal prosecution and limited prosecution for non-fake invoicing offences.

A. Core Categories of Prosecution Offences under Section 132(1)

Criminal liability attaches to the following key acts committed with intent to evade tax:

1. Supply Without Invoice [Clause (a)]: Supplying goods or services without issuing an invoice, or issuing a false invoice, with intent to evade tax.
2. Fake Invoicing / Bills Without Supply [Clause (b)]: Issuing an invoice or bill without actual supply of underlying goods or services, leading to wrongful availment or use of ITC or fraudulent refund.
3. Availing Fake ITC [Clause (c)]: Availing or using Input Tax Credit using an invoice or bill issued without underlying supply, or fraudulently availing ITC without any invoice.
4. Collecting Tax But Failing to Deposit [Clause (d)]: Collecting GST amounts from buyers but failing to pay the same to the credit of the Central/State Government beyond a period of three months from the due date.
5. Fraudulent Refunds [Clause (e)]: Fraudulently obtaining tax refunds under the Act.
6. Falsification of Financial Records [Clause (f)]: Falsifying or substituting financial records, or producing fake accounts and documents to evade tax.
7. Obstruction of Officers & Destruction of Evidence [Clauses (g) & (j)]: Obstructing any GST officer in discharging duties, or deliberately tampering with or destroying material evidence.

B. Classification of Offences: Cognizable vs. Non-Cognizable & Bailable Thresholds

The law categorizes offences based on the quantum of tax evaded, false ITC availed, or fraudulent refund claimed:

1. Cognizable & Non-Bailable Offences (Tax Evasion > Rs. 5 Crores):

   • Applicable Offences: Specifically covers offences under Section 132(1)(a), (b), (c), and (d) where the tax amount evaded or fake ITC claimed exceeds Rs. 5 Crores.
   • Legal Implication: Under Section 132(5), these offences are classified as cognizable and non-bailable. The Commissioner of GST can authorize arrest under Section 69 without requiring a prior warrant from a Judicial Magistrate.
   • Punishment: Imprisonment for a term extending up to 5 years along with a fine.

2. Non-Cognizable & Bailable Offences (Tax Evasion Between Rs. 2 Crores and Rs. 5 Crores):

   • Applicable Offences: Offences under clauses (a) through (l) where the tax amount involved is between Rs. 2 Crores and Rs. 5 Crores.
   • Legal Implication: Under Section 132(4), all offences other than those specified in Section 132(5) are non-cognizable and bailable. Arrested persons have an absolute statutory right to be released on bail at the level of the Assistant/Deputy Commissioner under Section 69(3).
   • Punishment: Imprisonment for a term extending up to 3 years along with a fine.

3. Bailable Offences for Fake Invoicing Between Rs. 1 Crore and Rs. 2 Crores:

   • Applicable Offences: Offences under Section 132(1)(b) and (c) (Fake Invoicing / Fake ITC without underlying supply) involving tax amounts between Rs. 1 Crore and Rs. 2 Crores.
   • Punishment: Imprisonment extending up to 1 year along with a fine.
   • Note on Decriminalization: Finance Act 2023 decriminalized all non-fake invoicing offences (such as obstruction, falsification of records, etc.) where the tax amount involved is up to Rs. 2 Crores. However, for fake invoicing without supply, criminal prosecution remains applicable starting from Rs. 1 Crore.

4. Repeat Offenders [Section 132(2)]:

   • Any person convicted of an offence under Section 132 who is again convicted of an offence under this section faces enhanced punishment extending up to 5 years imprisonment with fine, irrespective of the monetary amount in the second offence.

---

2. Punishment & Bailability Matrix Table

To provide clarity for corporate finance teams, promoters, and legal counsel, the following matrix maps tax evasion amounts to statutory offences, arrest powers, bailability, and maximum penal sentences under Section 132 of the CGST Act:

---

3. Executive Process Matrix: Prosecution, Arrest & Compounding Workflow

The following process matrix details the legal trajectory from initial search or inspection to prosecution sanction, arrest, bail application under BNSS, and statutory compounding under Section 138:

---

4. Powers of Arrest under Section 69 & Bail Procedures (CrPC to BNSS Transition)

Arrest under GST law is an extraordinary executive power. Understanding statutory safeguards and procedural rights under Section 69 read with the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) is vital when facing enforcement action.

A. Pre-requisites for Valid Arrest under Section 69

Under Section 69(1) of the CGST Act, the Commissioner of GST can authorize any officer to arrest a person only if the Commissioner has "reason to believe" that the person has committed a specified cognizable and non-bailable offence under Section 132(1)(a), (b), (c), or (d) involving tax exceeding Rs. 5 Crores.

Ground reality shows that tax officers often confuse suspicion with reason to believe. The Supreme Court of India in landmark rulings has held that:

1. Formulation of Belief: "Reason to believe" cannot be based on raw intelligence or subjective suspicion; it requires tangible material evidence recorded in official files.
2. Quantification Requirement: Before invoking powers of arrest, the revenue must tentatively quantify the tax evasion or fraudulent ITC amount to establish that it exceeds the statutory threshold of Rs. 5 Crores.
3. Arnesh Kumar Guidelines Applicability: The mandatory guidelines laid down by the Apex Court in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar apply to GST arrests. Arrest should not be executed routinely or mechanically simply because it is legally permissible; it must be justified by necessity (e.g., risk of absconding, tampering with evidence, or non-cooperation).

B. Mandate of Production Before Magistrate

Under Section 69(2), when a person is arrested for a cognizable and non-bailable offence, the GST officer is bound to produce the arrested individual before a Judicial Magistrate within 24 hours of arrest. If the officer fails to do so, the detention becomes unlawful.

C. Bail Procedure: Non-Bailable vs. Bailable Offences under BNSS

With the replacement of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) by the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) effective July 1, 2024, procedural filings for bail before Criminal Courts must conform to BNSS section references:

1. Procedure for Bailable Offences (Rs. 2 Cr to Rs. 5 Cr):

   • Under Section 69(3)(a) of the CGST Act, in respect of a non-cognizable and bailable offence, the Assistant Commissioner or Deputy Commissioner of GST exercises the same powers as an Officer-in-Charge of a Police Station under the code.
   • The arrested taxpayer is entitled to statutory bail as a matter of right at the GST office itself upon executing a personal bail bond and furnishing solvent local sureties.

2. Procedure for Non-Bailable Offences (> Rs. 5 Cr):

   • Anticipatory Bail under Section 482 of BNSS (formerly Section 438 CrPC): Where a taxpayer apprehends imminent arrest during DGGI investigations or after receiving summons under Section 70, an application for Anticipatory Bail can be filed before the Sessions Court or directly before the High Court of Chhattisgarh (Bilaspur) or High Court of Orissa (Cuttack). The courts evaluate whether the dispute is essentially interpretational/civil or involves deliberate fake invoicing.
   • Regular Bail under Section 480 / Section 483 of BNSS (formerly Section 437 / 439 CrPC): If arrested and remanded to judicial custody by the Magistrate, regular bail applications are filed before the Magistrate Court (Section 480 BNSS) or the Sessions / High Court (Section 483 BNSS). Judicial precedents affirm that where the investigation is largely documentary, digital records are seized, and the taxpayer demonstrates cooperation, continued judicial detention is unnecessary.

---

5. Compounding of Offences under Section 138: Statutory Settlement

For business owners who wish to avoid prolonged criminal trials, reputation damage, and uncertain court outcomes, Section 138 of the CGST Act provides a statutory mechanism for Compounding of Offences.

A. What is Compounding?

Compounding is a legal compromise between the taxpayer and the tax department. Upon payment of specified compounding fees to the credit of the Government, the criminal prosecution initiated against the taxpayer is dropped, and any pending trial before a Judicial Magistrate abates automatically without a conviction record.

B. Amended Compounding Fee Structure (Post Finance Act 2023)

To make compounding more practical and accessible, the legislature revised the compounding fee structure drastically:

• Prior Limit: Minimum 50% to Maximum 150% of the tax amount involved.
• Amended Statutory Limit (Current Law): Minimum 25% of the tax amount to a Maximum of 50% of the tax amount involved.

This 50% reduction in maximum compounding fees provides significant relief for taxpayers seeking to settle criminal proceedings.

C. Eligibility & Statutory Exclusions under Section 138 Proviso

Compounding is a statutory privilege, not an absolute right. Under the proviso to Section 138(1), compounding CANNOT be granted to:

1. Repeat Compounding Offenders: A person who has previously been allowed to compound an offence under Section 132 in respect of tax amounts exceeding Rs. 1 Crore.
2. IPC / BNS Offences: A person accused of committing an offence under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (or Indian Penal Code) independently of GST law (e.g., forgery of pan cards/identity documents for opening shell accounts).
3. Prior Conviction: A person who has been convicted of an offence under the CGST Act by a competent Court.
4. Obstructing / False Information Offences: Persons accused of obstructing tax officers or supplying false information during investigation.

D. Step-by-Step Compounding Application Procedure

1. Prerequisite Payment: The applicant must first discharge the complete outstanding tax liability, interest under Section 50, and civil penalties determined under Section 73, 74, or 74A via Form DRC-03.
2. Filing Application: An application for compounding must be submitted in Form GST CMP-01 to the Chief Commissioner or Commissioner of GST having jurisdiction before or after the institution of prosecution.
3. Order by Commissioner: The Commissioner examines the application, verifies compliance, and passes an order in Form GST CMP-02 specifying the exact compounding amount payable.
4. Payment & Immunity: The applicant must deposit the compounding fee within 30 days of receiving the order. Upon payment, immunity from prosecution is granted, and any pending criminal complaint before the court stands withdrawn.

---

6. Practical Defense & Pre-emptive Compliance Strategy for Industrialists & Contractors

In our ground-level advisory work across Chhattisgarh and Odisha, we recommend a proactive four-pillar defense framework for manufacturing units, civil contractors, and trading hubs:

1. Strict Vendor Verification & ITC Guardrails

The majority of Section 132 fake invoicing cases stem from tier-2 and tier-3 vendor defaults. Industrial units in Urla/Bhanpuri sourcing steel scrap, or civil contractors in Korba subcontracting labor, must implement mandatory inward checks:

• Reconcile GSTR-2B monthly prior to claiming ITC.
• Verify vendor GST registration status, compliance history, and physical place of business.
• Maintain physical evidence of inward goods movement: e-Way Bills, weighbridge (dharam kanta) slips, toll gate receipts, and bilty logs. In the absence of physical movement proof, tax authorities frequently treat invoices as fake supplies under Section 132(1)(b).

2. Handling Summons under Section 70 Without Coercion

When summoned by DGGI or State Tax Enforcement:

• Do not ignore Section 70 summons. Non-attendance can independently trigger penal action.
• Ensure authorized finance executives or directors appear with complete ledger accounts, bank statements, and tax returns.
• Statements recorded under Section 70 are admissible evidence in court. If statements are recorded under coercion, threat, or late-night pressure, immediate written retractment letters must be dispatched to senior officials via registered post within 24–48 hours.

3. Tactical Use of Payment "Under Protest"

If tax officers demand immediate tax deposits during search or inspection operations under threat of arrest:

• Taxpayers can deposit disputed amounts using Form DRC-03 while explicitly marking the payment as "Deposited Under Protest".
• This voluntary deposit mitigates allegations of mens rea and willingness to defraud, which proves invaluable when arguing bail petitions before Sessions or High Courts.

4. Differentiating Civil Interpretation from Criminal Intent

In any SCN or court defense, establish that the dispute involves legal interpretation—such as classification of goods, applicability of Reverse Charge Mechanism (RCM), or timing of ITC eligibility—rather than clandestine removal or bogus paper invoicing. Courts consistently protect taxpayers against Section 132 prosecution where genuine interpretational questions exist.

---

Strategic Practice Callout & Legal Defense Support

Handling GST prosecution notices, DGGI investigations, arrest threats, or compounding applications requires an expert blend of deep tax accounting knowledge and rigorous criminal litigation strategy.

At Rabi Agrawal & Associates, our senior practice leaders bring over 15 years of ground-level litigation experience across Chhattisgarh and Odisha. We provide strategic defense representation for:

• DGGI Zonal Summons & Search Interventions: Legal representation during summons under Section 70 and search proceedings under Section 67.
• Bail Strategy & BNSS Filings: Drafting and contesting Anticipatory Bail under Section 482 BNSS and Regular Bail before Sessions Courts and the High Courts of Chhattisgarh (Bilaspur) and Odisha (Cuttack).
• Section 138 Compounding Filings: Structuring end-to-end compounding applications in Form GST CMP-01 for smooth immunity from criminal trial.
• High Court Writ Petitions: Challenging arbitrary arrests, improper Section 69 authorizations, and unconstitutional bank account attachments under Section 83.

Consultation & Advisory Offices:

• Raipur Office (Chhattisgarh): Serving Urla, Bhanpuri, Siltara, Durg-Bhilai, Korba, and Bilaspur industrial zones.
• Kalahandi Office (Odisha): Serving Bhawanipatna, Jayapatna, Sambalpur, Jharsuguda, and Cuttack business hubs.

For urgent legal defense advisory or enforcement representation, contact our senior GST litigation team at Rabi Agrawal & Associates.