A writ petition was filed challenging the legality of the two seizure orders, through which the GST authorities seized approximately Rupees One Crore in cash from the premises of the Petitioner, exceeding the scope of Section 67 of the CGST Act.
THE HON’BLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF Nand Kishore Gupta V/s Additional Director General, decided on 17-12-2024
THE HON’BLE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF Vigneshwara Transport Company V/s Additional Commissioner of Central Tax, decided on 28-11-2024
The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Genesis Enterprises & Ors. held that surprise search and seizure actions under Section 67 of the CGST Act are valid when “reason to believe” is properly documented, but authorities must follow statutory safeguards, fair procedure, and ensure privacy and protected access to seized electronic data, including communication norms and de-sealing directions.
THE HON’BLE MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF Deepak Singhal V/s Union of India, decided on 11-9-2024
THE HON’BLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF Krishna Chaurasia V/s Additional Director General, Directorate General of GST Intelligence, decided on 6-9-2024
THE DELHI HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF Aimlay Pvt. Ltd. V/s Commissioner of Central Tax, Delhi West, decided on 25-7-2024
THE HON’BLE KERALA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF Velayudhan Gold LLP V/s Intelligence Officer, Intelligence Unit, Kottarakara, decided on 24-7-2024
THE HON’BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA IN THE CASE OF Commissioner of CGST V/s Deepak Khandelwal , decided on 14-8-2024
The Hon’ble Supreme Court, in the case of Commissioner of CGST v. Deepak Khandelwal upheld the direction to return valuables assets seized during a GST search, reinforcing that Section 67 CGST does not allow seizure of mere unaccounted assets.
