SGST High Court Cases

GST - Cross-empowerment of the Central and the State authorities - Parallel proceedings – Search at business premises – Petitioner impugns the action of search carried out at the petitioner’s business premises under Section 67 of the DGST Act, 2017 read with Rule 139 of the DGST Rules, 2017 – Validity of action of the State authorities under the DGST Act when petitioner having already subjected to search action at the hands of the Central Authorities under CGST Act - Whether recording of statement in the absence two independent witnesses or signatures makes the search action illegal – HELD - The petitioner’s case is not premised on any substantial cause of action - during search action the petitioner admitted his tax liability and stated that he would deposit the admitted liability - if indeed the statement was coerced by the Respondents, it was expected that the Petitioner would immediately, after the coercion ceased, take steps to retract the same - the present petition is in an attempt to wriggle out of the commitment made in the statement during the search action. Be that as it may, in case the statement was not recorded voluntarily, it would have to be established during adjudication of demand, for which the action would follow the completion of investigation. The admissibility of the statement cannot be securitized at this stage - the Petitioner cannot take recourse to challenging the search proceedings in an endeavour to withdraw the apparent admissions made in the said statement

Quick Search

/

Create Account



Log In



Forgot Password


Please Note: This facility is only for Subscribing Members.

Email this page



Feedback this page