The Court is of the considered view that the search proceedings were conducted without the authority of law and cannot be sustained.
Section 67 of the CGST Act, 2017— Search -- The petitioner submitted that on 6th March, 2020, a summons was issued to him for appearance on 16th March, 2020. However, on the very next day i.e. 7 th March, 2020, a search was conducted at his residential premises and a Panchnama was drawn up. The petitioner submitted that he being prepared to cooperate with the Respondents, there was no need for them to resort to an extreme step of conducting search and, that too, without following the due process. The respondent counsel submitted that the authorized representative of Petitioner, who had earlier appeared before the Respondents, was not cooperative and was not providing the requisite information. However, he did not dispute that the procedure outlined under Section 67 of the Act was perhaps not resorted to in going in for a search of the residential premises. The court observed that having issued summons to Petitioner to appear on 16th March, 2020, there was absolutely no need to resort to a search on the very next date. The search proceedings which took place on 7th March, 2020 without the authority of law and cannot be sustained.
Held that:-The Hon’ble High Court quashed the Panchnama drawn up on 7th March, 2020. Further, directed that the Petitioner will appear before the respondent on 25th March, 2020 and provide the information within a reasonable time. Listed the present petition for further hearing on 17th April, 2020. Till such time, no coercive steps of arresting Petitioner shall be resorted to.
The Court is of the considered view that the search proceedings were conducted without the authority of law and cannot be sustained.
Section 67 of the CGST Act, 2017— Search -- The petitioner submitted that on 6th March, 2020, a summons was issued to him for appearance on 16th March, 2020. However, on the very next day i.e. 7 th March, 2020, a search was conducted at his residential premises and a Panchnama was drawn up. The petitioner submitted that he being prepared to cooperate with the Respondents, there was no need for them to resort to an extreme step of conducting search and, that too, without following the due process. The respondent counsel submitted that the authorized representative of Petitioner, who had earlier appeared before the Respondents, was not cooperative and was not providing the requisite information. However, he did not dispute that the procedure outlined under Section 67 of the Act was perhaps not resorted to in going in for a search of the residential premises. The court observed that having issued summons to Petitioner to appear on 16th March, 2020, there was absolutely no need to resort to a search on the very next date. The search proceedings which took place on 7th March, 2020 without the authority of law and cannot be sustained.
Held that:-The Hon’ble High Court quashed the Panchnama drawn up on 7th March, 2020. Further, directed that the Petitioner will appear before the respondent on 25th March, 2020 and provide the information within a reasonable time. Listed the present petition for further hearing on 17th April, 2020. Till such time, no coercive steps of arresting Petitioner shall be resorted to.