9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (7) TMI 1854X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... confidence and that the whole proceedings of seizure, dated 07.02.2018, and all further proceedings, including the show cause notice for confiscation of the goods are in violation of the provisions under Section 67(2) of the Act and that the order of seizure, dated 07.02.2018, does not satisfy the procedural safeguards prescribed in that behalf. Following the said decision, it is held that the impugned seizure order, dated 07.02.2018, passed by first respondent is unconstitutional and violative of the provisions under Section 67 (2) of the SGST Act and that all the consequential orders are unsustainable under facts and law. Petition allowed. - W.P.No.31182 of 2018 - - - Dated:- 10-7-2019 - HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE M. SEETHARAMA MURT ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... GST Acts for brevity). The petitioner is doing business in jewellery. The first respondent, who is not the jurisdictional Assessing Authority of the petitioner, on the authorization given, on 07.02.2018, by the second respondent under Section 67(1) of the SGST Act, conducted inspection of the business premises of the petitioner on the same day. The inspection went on till late night hours. According to the petitioner, the first respondent, without any further authorization from the second respondent under Section 67(2) of the said Act, seized the jewellery and also all the books of accounts and records on the same day, vide the order of seizure, dated 07.02.2018, which is impugned in this writ petition. According to the petitioner, subsequ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d upon by the respondents, does not inspire the confidence as the record produced by the respondents in those cases does not inspire the confidence of the Court to come to a conclusion that such an authorization was given. In this admitted backdrop, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in view of the said findings recorded in identical cases, particularly in the order, dated 21.02.2019, passed in W.P.No.41408 of 2018, the contentions of the petitioner in this writ petition merit consideration and that the petitioner is entitled to the reliefs claimed. 5. Learned Government Pleader for Commercial Taxes appearing for the respondents submits that as per the ratio in the decision in Dekars Fires Security Systems Pvt. Ltd. Hyd. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
