9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (12) TMI 292X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt to the authorization issued in FORM GST INS-01 dated 11.11.2022. The petitioner claims that during the course of the search, he was compelled to deposit the sum of Rs.10,00,000/- [Rs.5,00,000/- under CGST Act and Rs.5,00,000/- under the Delhi Goods & Services Tax Act, 2017 (hereafter 'the DGST Act')]. Accordingly, the petitioner prays that directions be issued to the respondents to refund the sum of Rs.10,00,000/- as being collected illegally. In addition, the petitioner also prays that directions be issued for supply of the copy of FORM GST INS-01. 3. The petitioner has challenged the search stated to have been conducted under Section 67 of the CGST Act on principally two grounds. First, he claims that the authorization for the said search was issued mechanically and that there were no reasons to believe that any of the grounds as set out under Section 67(1)(a) of the CGST Act were satisfied. Second, he states that the proceedings initiated under Section 67 of the CGST Act are illegal as prior to the said search, the Delhi Goods & Service Tax Authorities had initiated similar proceedings, by conducting a search at the petitioner's principal place of business on 18.10.2022. The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t + Rs.5.00 Lakhs under DGST Act) by forcing petitioner to fill DRC-03 of Rs.10.00 Lakhs at odd hours without adjudication of demand. d. Respondent No. 3 be directed to supply copy of INS-01, Panchnama, statement recorded by them. e. Petitioner be compensated with cost for the suffering and harassment meted out to Petitioner due to illegal exercise of power when on cross empowerment of power in term of Section 5 &6 of the DGST Act I Section 5 & 6of CGST Act. f. Your Lordships may be pleased to issue order(s), direction(s), writ(s) or any other relief(s) including grant of no coercive measure against petitioner in the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice consequent to impugned search including staying proceeding being undertaken parallel by Respondent No. 2 and 3 till decision of this Writ Petition; g. For such other orders as the Hon'ble Court may deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the case including that Respondent should not press upon for payment in Form DRC-03 on basis of alleged statement of proprietor of Petitioner Company dated 12.11.2022 wrongly termed as voluntarily without following procedure prescribed in law i.e. first a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... esaid facts, the inspection carried out by the respondent authorities is illegal for want of reasons to believe that the conditions as set out in Section 67(1)(a) of the CGST Act are satisfied. 11. In Calcutta Discount Co. Ltd. v. Income Tax Officer, Companies District I Calcutta & Anr.: (1961) 2 SCR 241, the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court had, in the context of Section 34 of the Income Tax Act, 1922 observed as under: "37......The expression "reason to believe" postulates belief and the existence of reasons for that belief. The belief must be held in good faith: it cannot be merely a pretence. The expression does not mean a purely subjective satisfaction of the Income Tax Officer: the forum of decision as to the existence of reasons and the belief is not in the mind of the Income Tax Officer. If it be asserted that the Income Tax Officer had reason to believe that income had been underassessed by reason of failure to disclose fully and truly the facts material for assessment, the existence of the belief and the reasons for the belief, but not the sufficiency of the reasons, will be justiciable. The expression therefore predicates that the Income Tax Officer holds the b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed in the premises of the petitioner. It is also affirmed in the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents that neither any summons were issued to the petitioner, nor that the petitioner's statement was recorded on 12.11.2022. 18. The respondents claim that on 12.11.2022, the officers of the Anti-Evasion Branch, CGST visited the premises of the petitioner on the basis of an authorization issued in FORM GST INS-01 dated 11.11.2022. It is stated that on reaching the premises, the same were found closed. Accordingly, the petitioner was contacted and informed about the inspection. It is averred that he arrived at the premises along with his son and opened the same. He informed that his accountant was on leave and that he would submit all documents such as purchase ledger, purchase invoices from M/s Hari Om Chemicals, bank statements of the firms, copy of e-way bills and other necessary documents on 15.11.2022. The respondents further claim that the petitioner voluntarily deposited Rs.10,00,000/- by furnishing FORM GST DRC-03 on the said date. According to the respondents, the total ineligible ITC received by the petitioner, concern (M/s Mahan Polymers) from M/s Hari Om Chem ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
