9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (12) TMI 654X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... officer for so long as it is required for examination and for inquiry of proceedings under the CGST Act, 2017. This is in contrast with Section 67(7) as per which when goods are seized, the said seized goods have to be returned to the person who whom they were seized within six months of the seizure of goods, unless and until, the proper officer, on sufficient cause, extends the same for a further period of not exceeding then six months. By a conjoint reading of sections 67(2) second proviso, 67(3), 74(2), 74(10) the documents or book or things can be retained for a maximum period of four and half years, within which period the notice has to be issued, plus thirty days from the date of erroneous refund. In the present case, the said period had not yet lapsed. Accordingly, at this stage, this Court does not deem it appropriate to direct release of the computer, laptop, documents and other things seized vide punchnama dated 28th August, 2019. Writ petitions dismissed. - W.P.(C) 7517/2020 - - - Dated:- 12-12-2022 - JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH Petitioner Through: Mr. Akhil Krishnan Maggu, Advocate. Respondent Through: Mr. Ravi Prakash with Mr. Varun Aggarwal Mr. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... GST refunds and siphoning the same. FIRs are stated to have been registered in this regard. The counter affidavit claims that in the process of unearthing these transactions the search and seizure were conducted at B-773, Sushant Lok-1, Gurugram, Haryana in which computer, laptops, documents and other documents were seized on 28th August, 2019, the release of which is sought for in this petition. The relief sought in this petition is as under: (i) To issue a writ of mandamus order to the respondent thereby directing the respondents to release the computer, laptop, documents and things seized on 28.08.2019 vide panchnama dated 28.08.2019 unconditionally. (ii) To pass such other or further order/s which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper. 6. The submission of Mr. Akhil Krishnan Maggu, ld. Counsel for the Petitioner is that he had represented the four firms/ individuals and had sought defreezing of bank accounts in W.P.(C) 3304/2019 titled Micra Overseas v. Directorate of GST Intelligence Anr, however, finally the said writ came to be withdrawn. It is his submission that since he was involved in that case, his family is sought to be implicated. He subm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of inspection, search and seizure.- (1) Where the proper officer, not below the rank of Joint Commissioner, has reasons to believe that (a) a taxable person has suppressed any transaction relating to supply of goods or services or both or the stock of goods in hand, or has claimed input tax credit in excess of his entitlement under this Act or has indulged in contravention of any of the provisions of this Act or the rules made thereunder to evade tax under this Act; or (b) any person engaged in the business of transporting goods or an owner or operator of a warehouse or a godown or any other place is keeping goods which have escaped payment of tax or has kept his accounts or goods in such a manner as is likely to cause evasion of tax payable under this Act, he may authorise in writing any other officer of central tax to inspect any places of business of the taxable person or the persons engaged in the business of transporting goods or the owner or the operator of warehouse or godown or any other place. (2) Where the proper officer, not below the rank of Joint Commissioner, either pursuant to an inspection carried out under sub-section (1) or otherwise, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ax has not been paid or short paid or erroneously refunded or where input tax credit has been wrongly availed or utilised by reason of fraud, or any wilful-misstatement or suppression of facts to evade tax, he shall serve notice on the person chargeable with tax which has not been so paid or which has been so short paid or to whom the refund has erroneously been made, or who has wrongly availed or utilised input tax credit, requiring him to show cause as to why he should not pay the amount specified in the notice along with interest payable thereon under section 50 and a penalty equivalent to the tax specified in the notice. (2) The proper officer shall issue the notice under sub-section (1) at least six months prior to the time limit specified in sub-section (10) for issuance of order. xxx (10) The proper officer shall issue the order under sub-section (9) within a period of five years from the due date for furnishing of annual return for the financial year to which the tax not paid or short paid or input tax credit wrongly availed or utilised relates to or within five years from the date of erroneous refund. 10. There is a clear distinction brought ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
