Back
SHEEL NAGU, MANINDER S. BHATTI
Sanjay Trading Company – Appellant
Versus
State of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent
ORDER
1. The petitioner filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has approached this Court while praying for the following reliefs:
i. To hold that the proceeding initiated under Section 67 of the Act us void ab initio;
ii. To quash authorization letter dated 21/01/2022 issued by respondent No.2 (Annexure P/4);
iii To quash the impugned order dated 27/01/2022 (Annexure P/11) passed by the respondent No.5.
iv To direct the respondent department to conduct stock verification as per law, without being influenced by stock verification report dated 25/01/2022.
v Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to pass any order writ/order which this Hon'ble Court deem fit and proper in the fact and circumstance of the case.
2. The facts reveal that the premises of the petitioner was searched at the instance of the revenue in exercise of powers conferred under Section 67 of the M.P. GST Act, 2017 and thereafter the petitioner since had certain grievances as regards the manner of search, made an application before respondent No.4 and prayed that stock of coal lying in the premises be measured and checked again as earlier on 25/01/2022, the team which carried out the search did not s
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the search procedure under Section 67 of the M.P. GST Act, 2017 must be conducted in accordance with the law, and voluntary actions of the pet....
Authorization for search and seizure under the U.P. GST Act must comply with statutory procedures; failure to comply renders the action illegal and void.
The sufficiency of the reasons for forming a belief under Section 67 of the CGST Act is not subject to judicial review as long as there is material or information providing a rational basis for the b....
Search actions under the GST framework are valid even without independent witnesses if conducted lawfully, and coercion claims must be substantiated for retraction to succeed.
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 court ruled that search and seizure actions under the CGST Act require a substantiated belief backed by evidence, as arbitrary suspicion is insufficient for such intrusive powers.
Only a Joint Commissioner can authorize inspections under the GST Act, and there is no requirement to disclose the authorization details to the taxable person, though they must be informed of its exi....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
