Lawyer Cannot Be Raided Merely for Representing Clients' Tax Cases: Delhi HC Reprimands GST Dept [Read Order]

The GST Department was warned by the Delhi High Court for harassing a tax lawyer by raiding his offices in relation to a client's alleged GST evasion. It turned out that the lawyer was only submitting the client's tax case.

The petitioner, Mr. Puneet Batra challenged the search at the office of the Petitioner conducted by the GST Department on 25th July, 2025, and the consequent seizure of the Central Processing Unit ( “the CPU”) and other documents for being illegal.

The Petitioner is an advocate who is stated to be a member of the Delhi High Court Bar Association as also the Sales Tax Bar Association and the New Delhi Bar Association (Patiala House District Court). As per the petition, he is a regular practitioner in diverse fields of law including direct and indirect taxation, school fee regulation matters, Cyber Law and other criminal matters.

The firm M/s. Bass Legal LLP (“the firm”) is a tax consulting firm run by the Petitioner’s parents, and the Petitioner is an Advocate who handles all the taxation matters on behalf of the firm. One M/s. Martkarma Technology Pvt. Ltd. ( “the client”) which is a gaming company had engaged the Petitioner for rendering various professional and legal services, including GST filings before Registrar of Companies, Income Tax returns, Intellectual Property Rights registration work, cyber crime, etc. It is stated that the said services are being provided by the Petitioner to the client since 2023.

A search was conducted at the client’s registered premises on 4th and 5th September, 2024 by the GST Department. It is stated that the Petitioner was handling more than 100 cases, on behalf of the client including in respect of the said search. The Petitioner received a summons for appearance before the Anti-Evasion Branch, CGST Delhi East on 23rd September, 2024.

According to the Petitioner, he filed a reply stating that he is merely the lawyer for the client and the same was taken on record by the GST Department. A second summon was received on 1st October, 2024 directing appearance on 3rd October, 2024.

The Petitioner could not appear on the said date, however, a written representation was filed by him which was also taken on record. On 10th June, 2025 a third summon received directing appearance on 12th June, 2025, however, the Petitioner could not appear on the said date as he was travelling. Finally, on 26th June, 2025 he was again served with another summon dated 19th June, 2025 and on 27th June, 2025 he appeared before the Anti-Evasion Branch, CGST Delhi East, and gave his statement.

Comprehensive Guide of Law and Procedure for Filing of Income Tax Appeals, Click Here

During the said search various documents relating to the client have been resumed by the GST Department. In addition, the Partnership Deed related to the firm and other documents, have also been resumed by the GST Department.

The GST Department has also seized electronic gadgets being a complete CPU having 1250 GB. A summon has also been issued to the Petitioner on 25th July, 2025 to appear before the GST Department today at 12:30 p.m. Accordingly, the present writ petition has been mentioned in the morning today and was taken up post lunch.

It was argued that the Petitioner has merely represented his client and the GST Department is not empowered to resume any documents and seize the Petitioner’s CPU which could have various other privileged material.

A division bench of Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Shail Jain observed that “The Advocate cannot be subjected to harassment in this manner unless and until there is some material for the GST Department to show that the advocate himself is not merely representing his client but is also personally involved in the alleged illegality. For the said purpose, some prima facie material would have to be shown by the GST Department.”

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