Section 145 of GST
Admissibility of micro films, facsimile copies of documents and computer printouts as documents and as evidence
Statutory provision (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force,—
(a) a micro film of a document or the reproduction of the image or images embodied in such micro film (whether enlarged or not); or(b) a facsimile copy of a document; or(c) a statement contained in a document and included in a printed material produced by a computer, subject to such conditions as may be prescribed; or(d) any information stored electronically in any device or media, including any hard copies made of such information,
shall be deemed to be a document for the purposes of this Act and the rules made thereunder and shall be admissible in any proceedings thereunder, without further proof or production of the original, as evidence of any contents of the original or of any fact stated therein of which direct evidence would be admissible. (2) In any proceedings under this Act or the rules made thereunder, where it is desired to give a statement in evidence by virtue of this section, a certificate,—
(a) identifying the document containing the statement and describing the manner in which it was produced;(b) giving such particulars of any device involved in the production of that document as may be appropriate for the purpose of showing that the document was produced by a computer,
shall be evidence of any matter stated in the certificate and for the purposes of this sub-section it shall be sufficient for a matter to be stated to the best of the knowledge and belief of the person stating it. Related provisions of the Statute:
Analysis and Updates
Introduction Both the sections i.e. Section 144 dealing with ” Presumption as to Documents in Certain Cases” and Section 145 dealing with “Admissibility of micro films, facsimile copies of documents and computer printouts as documents and evidence” are analysed together. Analysis As per the Webster Dictionary presumption means “a belief that something is true even though it has not been proved”. Presumption, is an inference of fact drawn from other known facts, unless there is contrary evidence. Matters that need to be proved are those that are disputed. In other words, matters that are not disputed need not be proved. Proof varies in the degree of evidentiary value available to establish their existence or absence. More serious a matter, more persuasive should be the evidence. Contemporaneous documents, events and records scored high in evidentiary value due to their generation in the ordinary course of transactions. Special evidence produced needs to first pass the test of admissibility and then pass the test of adequacy of what they stand to evidence. This presumption is rebuttable, since, any contrary evidence provided by the assessee, negates such presumption and such presumption is not a conclusive proof. The words “shall presume” in the Act suggest that the judge cannot refuse to draw the presumption. Presumption does not mean assumption. Presumption only means that the authority may proceed expecting the thing required to be presumed to be true. That is, the authority may proceed on the supposition that the thing exists unless disproved. Evidence produced to the contrary can displace this presumption. But evidence is that which produces a persuasion in the mind about the existence or absence of the thing that it evidences. Evidence produced that is incompatible with the innocence of the circumstances of its generation is not satisfactory. That nothing has not been satisfactorily proved does not mean that anything has been disproved. Only when the thing has been satisfactorily established not to exist can it be said that it has been disproved. In other words, not approved is the failure to prove and disprove is a success to prove the contrary. In general, practice the onus of proving relevance and genuineness of documents produced as evidence is on the person producing the said documents. This chapter deals with documents produced as evidence by prosecution. Further, this section has placed the onus of proving the contrary on the assessee i.e. the assessee has to prove that the documents provided by prosecution are not proper evidence. Balance of probability is where the existence of a thing is admitted by substandard and circumstantial evidence that leans in favor of likelihood and not beyond reasonable doubt. The degree of proof required in GST in matters relating to prosecution is beyond reasonable doubt and not merely the likelihood of offense. However, in matters invoking penalty, balance of probability may be applied. Plausible explanation is not possible explanation. The reasons attributed for the failure to comply with GST law or for the delay in filing appeal within the time prescribed or any other similar matter, the ‘standard of proof’ is guided by the nature of wrongdoing being inquired. Plausible is possible coupled with probability in the circumstances of the case. The dismissal of evidence in one proceeding cannot expunge that evidence for all proceedings. For example, where income tax assessment has been carried out on the basis of best judgment after the rejection of books of accounts, the same books of accounts can still supply evidence of contemporaneous transaction in a proceeding under GST law. The term ‘document’ has been defined under section 2(41) so as to include written or printed record of any sort and electronic record as defined in the Information Technology Act, 2000. Any information stored electronically or any hard copies made thereof is treated as document. A certificate by a responsible person in relation to the operation of the computer or the management of such activities is required for identifying the document and describing the manner in which it was produced is required. Relevant rules It may be noted that Rule 56 of CGST Rules, mandates to maintain specific records at related place of business as mentioned in the certificate of registration Comparative Review. Comparison to Central Excise: Sections 144 and 145 of the CGST Act are like Sections 36A and 36B of the Central Excise Act respectively. In addition, Sec 12B of the Central Excise Act deals with Presumption that the incidence of duty has been passed on to the buyer. Landmark Judgements: In the case of Commissioner of Central Excise and Customs, Surat – Vs. Vinod Kumar Gupta, a computer printout of the data collected on USB during a raid was adduced as an evidence against the manufacturer, and further the witnesses had disowned their statements, The Hon’ble Gujarat High Court has held that such reliance on such material was impermissible in view of non-fulfilling the conditions sub-section (2) of Section 36-B of the Central Excise Act. MCQ Q1. Document includes:(a) Written record(b) Printed Record(c) Electronic(d) All of the above Ans. (d) All of the above Recommended Articles –
GST ScopeGST ReturnGST FormsGST RateGST RegistrationWhat is GST?GST Invoice FormatGST Composition SchemeHSN CodeGST LoginGST RulesGST StatusTrack GST ARNTime of Supply
