IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Prathiba M. Singh, J.
Dhruv Krishan Maggu - Appellant
Versus
Principal Director General, Dggi (Hqrs.), RK Puram, New Delhi - Respondent
W.P.(C) 7517 of 2020
Decided On : 12-12-2022
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. background of gst refund scam investigation. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. arguments regarding seizure and return of documents. (Para 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 3. court's analysis on legal provisions of cgst. (Para 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 4. conclusion and dismissal of writ petition. (Para 12 , 13) |
JUDGMENT
Prathiba M. Singh, J, (Oral)--This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.
2. The Petitioner-Dhruv Krishan Maggu in the present case seeks return of his laptop, computer, documents and other things which were seized by the Respondents/Directorate General of GST Intelligence (DGGI) in a search conducted on 28th August, 2019 vide panchnama dated 28th August, 2019.
3. The brief background of this case is that the DGGI is stated to have received a communication from the Chief Manager, Allahabad Bank, Jawala Heri Market, Paschim Vihar informing the DGGI Headquarters of certain high level transactions related to refund of GST credited to four bank accounts. The said accounts were newly opened and the refund amount was being withdrawn immediately by the bank account holders. This communication was received in February, 2019. It was observed that the addresses of all the firms were the same. Owing to the action taken at that time, the bank accounts of M/s Monal Enterprises, Aircon Overseas, Micra Overseas, and Ganeshi Inc., were frozen. The total amount credited in the bank accounts of the said companies was found to be to the tune of Rs.10,32,21,718/-. Follow up action and, further, enquiries accompanied with search conducted at the premises, which was a common address of all the four firms, revealed that the firms were, in fact, non-functional and non-existent.
4. The statements of the proprietors were recorded which revealed that the said individuals namely, Mr. Deepak Kumar Mishra, Mr. Santosh Prasad and Mr. Manoj Kumar were not aware of any details and they have merely provided their IDs such as PAN card, Aadhaar card to one Mr. Mukesh Kumar and signed a lot of documents. According to the DGGI, further investigation revealed that a total number of 23 fake firms were opened in the names of persons who were found to be labourers, drivers, cooks, street hawkers, etc. The fraudulent refunds of IGST of more than Rs.63 crores is stated to have been siphoned off by these persons/firms.
5. The counter affidavit on behalf of the Respondents reveals that there are various allegations of IGST refund and certain individuals including Mr. Dhruv Maggu, the present Petitioner, Mr. Ramesh Wadera and Mr. Sanjeev Maggu and his brother Mr. Akhil Krishan Muggu were found to be involved in the process of availing IGST 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 submits that despite substantial time having lapsed since 15th August, 2019, as per him when the seizure took place from the Petitioner, computer, laptops, documents, etc. are not being re
Retention of seized documents is valid under applicable statutory provisions when ongoing inquiries are necessary, reflecting judicial deference to regulatory timelines and the complexity of fraud in....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the issuance of a show cause notice after the specified period does not invalidate the notice, and the court may reserve all rights and conten....
Seizure of cash under CGST Section 67(2) invalid absent recorded 'reason to believe' of secretion and relevance to proceedings; automatic return mandated under Section 67(7) if no notice within six m....
A show cause notice issued under the GST Act based on an investigation by an improper officer is invalid and must be set aside.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that while the search authorization was deemed legal, the deposit made by the petitioner was found to be under duress and not voluntary, emphasizin....
Point Of Law: Determination of tax not paid or short paid or erroneously refunded or input tax credit wrongly availed or utilised by reason of fraud or any wilfulmisstatement or suppression of facts.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.