Sold Property During Pending Appeal, Defied Court Order: Andhra Pradesh High Court Sends Man To Jail For Contempt Hostile Witness Cannot Erase a Bribe Demand Already Made on Record: Supreme Court Restores Conviction of Ration Officer Three Decades of Unpaid Wages: Supreme Court Strips Gannon Dunkerley of Control Over Sick Company's Assets, Appoints Administrator to Pay Workers by August 2026 Gram Nyayalaya Cannot Touch Family Court's Maintenance Orders — Allahabad High Court Draws the Line Caste Abuse Allegation at Village Jatra Is Counter-Blast to Earlier Machete Attack: Karnataka High Court Grants Anticipatory Bail Despite SC/ST Act Bar Contributory Negligence | Not Wearing a Helmet Does Not Mean the Victim Caused the Accident: Madras High Court Air Force Can't Punish Officer After Criminal Court Sets Him Free: Supreme Court Overturns 30-Year-Old Dismissal Written Statement Without Affidavit of Admission/Denial: Non-Est Filing or Curable Defect? Delhi High Court Refers Conflicting Views to Larger Bench Bank's Negligence Killed Cheque Bounce Case Before It Could Begin: Supreme Court Rules Section 138 Remedy Lost Due to Stale Cheques Bank Letting Your Cheques Go Stale Is Deficiency in Service: Supreme Court Victim Has Locus To Request Court To Summon Witnesses Under Section 311 CrPC In State Prosecution: Allahabad High Court Benefit Of Probation Act Available Even If Offender Is Sentenced Solely To Fine: Supreme Court Reporting Registration Of FIR Based On Public Records Does Not Violate Right To Privacy: Sikkim High Court CBSE Cannot Cancel Class XII Results Based on Similar MCQ Answers Alone Without Any Report of Malpractice From Examination Centre: Orissa High Court

“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