Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Don't have an account? Register Here
<h1>Court orders respondents to provide seized document copies to petitioners at petitioners' cost. Initial deposit required.</h1> <h3>HARSHVADAN RAJNIKANT TRIVEDI Versus UNION OF INDIA</h3> HARSHVADAN RAJNIKANT TRIVEDI Versus UNION OF INDIA - 2014 (308) E.L.T. 464 (Guj.) Issues Involved:Petition under Article 226 for mandamus, certiorari, and appropriate writ for photocopies of seized documents. Interpretation of Clause 55(m) of Central Excise Intelligence and Investigation Manual regarding rights of the assessee during search and seizure.Analysis:1. The petitioners sought photocopies of documents seized under a panchnama, stating they were not asking for the originals but only copies, willing to bear costs. Respondents objected, citing ongoing inquiry and lack of cooperation from petitioners.2. The petitioners argued they were ready to pay extra for the photocopies, disputing non-cooperation claims. Respondents relied on Clause 55(m) of the Central Excise Manual, stating the petitioners were only entitled to inspect seized documents, not get copies until investigation concludes.3. The Court noted petitioners' request for photocopies, not originals, and willingness to pay additional costs. It found no specific provision barring photocopy requests at the petitioners' expense, despite Clause 55(m) conferring rights to the assessee during search and seizure.4. Consequently, the Court held that the concerned respondents must provide photocopies of the seized documents at the petitioners' cost. The petitioners were directed to deposit an initial sum, with additional costs to be settled based on actual expenses incurred. The process was to be completed within four weeks, with no costs imposed on either party.