Consensual Relationship That Later Turns Sour Is Not Rape: Andhra Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in Breach of Promise Case Double Presumption of Innocence Applies; No Interference Unless Trial Court Judgment Is Perverse: Allahabad High Court in Murder Appeal Under BNSS A Single Act of Corruption Warrants Dismissal – 32 Years of Service Offers No Immunity: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds ASI’s Removal Suit Against Trustee Without Charity Commissioner’s Consent Is Statutorily Barred: Bombay High Court Government Can't Deny Implied Surrender After Refusing to Accept Possession: Madras HC Clarifies Scope of Section 111(f) of TP Act Custodial Interrogation Must Prevail Over Pre-Arrest Comfort in Hate Speech Cases: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail for Provocative Remarks Against Migrants Mutation Order Without Notice Cannot Stand in Law: Orissa High Court Quashes Tahasildar's Rejection for Violating Natural Justice Cruelty Must Be Grave and Proven – Mere Allegations of Disobedience or Demand for Separate Residence Don’t Justify Divorce: Jharkhand High Court Rejects Husband’s Divorce Appeal Retaliatory Prosecution Cannot Override Liberty: Himachal Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in PMLA Case Post CBI Trap of ED Officer Illegal Remand Without Production of Accused Is Not a Technical Lapse, But a Constitutional Breach: Andhra Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in Major NDPS Case Inherent Power Under Section 528 BNSS Not a Substitute for Article 226 When FIR Is Under Challenge Without Chargesheet or Cognizance Order: Allahabad High Court Possession Without Title Is Legally Insubstantial: Gujarat HC Dismisses Appeal By Dairy Cooperative Over Void Land Transfer You Can Prosecute a Former Director, But You Can’t Force Him to Represent the Company: Calcutta High Court Lays Down Clear Limits on Corporate Representation in PMLA Cases Conviction Cannot Rest on Tainted Testimony of Injured Witnesses in Isolation: Bombay High Court Acquits Five in Murder Case One Attesting Witness is Sufficient if He Proves Execution and Attestation of Will as Required by Law: AP High Court Land Acquisition | Delay Cannot Defeat Just Compensation: P&H High Court Grants Enhanced Compensation Despite 12-Year Delay in Review Petitions by Landowners Allegations Implausible, Motivated by Malice: Kerala High Court Quashes Rape Case After Finding Abuse Claims a Counterblast to Civil Dispute Adoptions Under Hindu Law Need No Approval from District Magistrate: Madras High Court Declares Administrative Rejection of Adoptive Birth Certificate as Illegal Findings of Fact Cannot Be Re-Appreciated in an Appeal Under Section 10F Companies Act: Madras High Court Equality Is Not A Mechanical Formula, But A Human Commitment: P&H High Court Grants Visually Impaired Mali Retrospective Promotions With Full Benefits Orissa High Court Rules Notice for No Confidence Motion Must Include Both Requisition and Resolution – Provision Held Mandatory Ashramam Built on Private Land, Managed by Family – Not a Public Religious Institution: Andhra Pradesh High Court Quashes Endowments Notification Cruelty Must Be Proved, Not Presumed: Gujarat High Court Acquits Deceased Husband In 498A Case After 22 Years Trade Dress Protection Goes Beyond Labels: Calcutta High Court Affirms Injunction Over Coconut Oil Packaging Mimicry Mere Filing of Income Tax Returns Does Not Exonerate the Accused: Madras High Court Refuses Discharge to Wife of Public Servant in ₹2 Crore DA Case

“Court Directs Release of ₹15,92,000 Seized in CGST Act Search, Citing Lack of Empowerment Under Section 67”

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Delhi High Court has directed the Commissioner of Goods and Services Tax (East) to release ₹15,92,000 that was seized during a search operation. The court observed that the seizure was not empowered under Section 67 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act (CGST Act).

The bench, consisting of Hon’ble Mr. Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Hon’ble Mr. Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav, delivered the judgement on August 24, 2023. The petitioner, Rajeev Chhatwal, had filed the case seeking the release of the seized amount.

“The petitioner contends that the seizure was not empowered by the said section,” the court noted in its judgement. This observation was pivotal in the court’s decision to direct the respondent to “remit the amount seized to the petitioner’s bank account within a period of two weeks from today along with accrued interest.”

The petitioner was arrested along with two others, Asif Khan and Arjun Sharma, but was later released on bail. The respondent had alleged that the petitioner was involved in a racket of issuing fake invoices. However, the petitioner denied these allegations and claimed that he had signed various documents under coercion.

The court also referred to a recent decision in Deepak Khandelwal Proprietor M/s Shri Shyam Metal v. Commissioner of CGST, Delhi West & Anr.: 2023:DHC:5823-DB, which favored the petitioner’s claim regarding the seizure.

While the court has directed the release of the seized amount, it clarified that “the respondent is not precluded from taking any such steps or measures as available in accordance with law.”

This ruling sets an important precedent for cases involving seizures under the CGST Act and emphasizes the need for authorities to strictly adhere to the provisions of the law.

Date of Decision:  August 24, 2023

RAJEEV CHHATWAL vs COMMISSIONER OF GOODS AND  SERVICES TAX (EAST)               

Latest Legal News