Delhi HC Permits GST Dept. to Examine Advocate’s Seized CPU Under Strict Conditions, Protects Attorney-Client Privilege [Read Order]

The High Court of Delhi, permitted the Goods and Service Tax ( GST ) Department to examine the Central Processing Unit ( CPU ) seized from advocate’s office under strict conditions, while safeguarding attorney-client privilege and third-party client data.

Puneet Batra, petitioner-assessee, was an advocate and member of the Delhi High Court Bar Association, the Sales Tax Bar Association, and the New Delhi Bar Association (Patiala House District Court). He regularly practiced in taxation, school fee regulation, cyber law, and criminal matters.

The petitioner handled taxation matters for his parents’ firm, M/s. Bass Legal LLP. Since 2023, he provided legal and professional services to M/s. Martkarma Technology Pvt. Ltd., a gaming company, including GST filings, income tax returns, intellectual property registrations, and cyber-crime matters.

The GST Department conducted a search at the client’s premises on 4th to 5th September 2024. Unable to contact the client, the petitioner withdrew his Vakalatnama/Power of Attorney on 6th September 2024. He received multiple summons from the Anti-Evasion Branch, CGST Delhi East, between September 2024 and June 2025, filing written representations when he could not appear. He finally appeared on 27th June 2025 and gave his statement.

On 25th July 2025, the GST Department searched the petitioner’s office and firm premises, seizing client-related documents, the partnership deed of the firm, and electronic devices, including a CPU with 1250 GB. A summon was issued for 28th July 2025.

The petitioner filed a writ petition. On 28th July 2025, the Court directed the GST Department to file an affidavit and stayed the petitioner’s appearance. The Court also prohibited opening or downloading the CPU contents without the petitioner or his representative.

On 4th August 2025, the GST Department claimed the petitioner was running the client’s business, not merely representing it. The Court directed the Department to produce supporting material in a sealed cover and listed the matter for 25th August 2025. Interim directions were extended.

On 1st September 2025, the GST Department submitted a note alleging the petitioner’s involvement in the client’s online gaming business under the domain ‘11winner.com,’ along with recorded statements and remand applications, all retained in a sealed cover.Customs Duty Drawback Fraud: Delhi HC Allows Appeal on 'Beneficial Owner' Applicability with Pre-deposit Adjustment [Read Order]

Justice Prathiba M Singh and Justice Shail Jain refrained from commenting on the petitioner’s role or whether he was involved in running the client’s business. It permitted the CPU seized from the petitioner during the raid at M/s Bass Legal LLP, where his parents are partners, to be examined by the GST Department, subject to strict conditions to protect data related to third-party clients and maintain attorney-client confidentiality.

The panchnama of 25th July 2025 recorded the search proceedings. Officers, in the presence of two witnesses and the petitioner’s father, seized documents related to the client, the LLP agreement, and the petitioner’s CPU. The CPU had been accessed by GST officials without the petitioner present.

The Court directed that the CPU be examined in the presence of the petitioner, either two lawyers or one lawyer and a forensic expert, senior IT officials of the Delhi High Court, and a forensic expert representing the GST Department. The procedure included checking the last access of files, files accessed during the 25th July 2025 inspection, and whether any files had been deleted, copied, or removed.

The hard drive was to be cloned, with a copy provided to the petitioner, while relevant client-related files were to be supplied to the GST Department. The CPU was to remain sealed after the procedure.

The GST Department was ordered to file a redacted affidavit detailing any allegations against the petitioner based on the CPU data, intended steps against him or others, his role as revealed by statements, and data obtained from the CPU. The redacted affidavit was to be shared with the petitioner’s counsel, with the non-redacted version shown to the Court.

The CPU inspection was scheduled for 11th and 12th September 2025 from 11:00 AM. The fees of the IT officials were fixed at Rs. 1,00,000 each, to be shared equally between the petitioner and the GST Department.

No coercive action was permitted against the petitioner during the inspection. The original investigation file was returned to the GST Department, and other material submitted in a sealed cover was retained by the Registry for the next hearing on 30th October 2025.

Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates