9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (6) TMI 117 - HC - GSTReturn of records seized at the time of inspection - HELD THAT - The petitioner through Exts. P11 and P12 requested the 2nd respondent to examine the seized records including the CD in the presence of the Authorized Representative of the petitioner. The reason for making a request for verification of record in the presence of Authorized Representative of petitioner is that, the petitioner would have opportunity to explain the omissions or commissions if any otherwise erroneously noticed by the 2nd respondent without further enquiry in this behalf - Government Pleader does not oppose the prayer for verification of record in the presence of Authorized Representative of petitioner. The 2nd respondent considers the request of the petitioner made through Exts. P11 and P12, intimates a particular day and time to the petitioner for undertaking the verification of record in the presence of Authorized Representative of petitioner-Company - Petition disposed off.
Issues involved:
Petitioner's request for rerun and verification of seized records, presence of Authorized Representative during verification, direction to 1st respondent to halt proceedings. Analysis: The petitioner sought a writ of mandamus for the rerun of records covered by Ext. P2 seized during inspection due to the expiration of the statutory retention period. Additionally, the petitioner requested verification of seized records in the presence of their Authorized Representative to explain any discrepancies. The learned Government Pleader did not oppose this request, leading to the disposal of the writ petition with specific directions. The 2nd respondent was instructed to schedule the verification in the presence of the Authorized Representative, with the petitioner required to provide the representative's details within two weeks. The 2nd respondent was directed to complete the verification promptly, preferably within four weeks of receiving the information from the petitioner. Furthermore, the 1st respondent was ordered to refrain from taking any steps based on Ext. P8 until the verification process was finalized.
|
