Section 136 – Relevancy of Statements under Certain Circumstances

Section 136 provides that statements made and signed by a person before a GST officer during an inquiry or investigation may be used as evidence in certain situations. Normally, a person who gives a statement should be available for examination before the court. However, this section creates exceptions where the statement can still be relied upon even if the person is unavailable.

A statement may be treated as relevant evidence if the person who made it is dead, cannot be found, is incapable of giving evidence, is kept out of the way by the opposite party, or if securing his presence would involve unreasonable delay or expense. The court must be satisfied that such circumstances genuinely exist.

The purpose of this provision is to prevent important evidence from becoming unusable merely because a witness is unavailable. GST investigations often involve multiple parties, transporters, suppliers, brokers, and employees. Statements recorded during investigations can therefore play a crucial role in establishing facts.

However, the statement must have been recorded lawfully by an authorized officer during official proceedings. Courts also examine the reliability and credibility of such statements before relying upon them.

Example:
A transporter admits during investigation that goods were moved using fake invoices. If the transporter later becomes unavailable and cannot be traced, the signed statement may still be considered as evidence by the court.

Key Point:
Certain statements recorded during GST investigations can be used as evidence even if the maker is unavailable.

In One Line:
Lawfully recorded statements may remain valid evidence under specified circumstances.