Petition challenging GST panchnamas dismissed for lack of prejudice.

The court dismissed the petition challenging the validity of panchnamas conducted by GST authorities, citing lack of demonstrated prejudice to the petitioner during the adjudication process. The court emphasized the petitioner's opportunity to raise objections during the show cause notice proceedings and found the petition lacking substance and merit, without issuing notice to the other party.

---

---

Issues:
Challenge to the validity of panchnamas dated 15.06.2020, 17.06.2020, 04.07.2020, and 06.07.2020 under CGST Act, 2017.

Analysis:

Issue 1: Challenge to Panchnamas
The petitioner, a company engaged in cigarette manufacturing, challenged the panchnamas dated 15.06.2020, 17.06.2020, 04.07.2020, and 06.07.2020 conducted by GST authorities. The petitioner alleged that the authorities sealed the generator sets and manufacturing machines citing non-functionality and reduced production capacity. The petitioner sought de-sealing, which was denied for non-compliance with Trade Notice No.04/2020-2021. The petitioner approached the court challenging the denial and the validity of the Trade Notice.

Issue 2: Violation of CGST Act
The petitioner contended that multiple inspections/searches conducted on various dates post-receipt of the show cause notice on 08.06.2022 were in violation of Section 67(1) & (2) of the CGST Act. The petitioner argued that these actions should be set aside. The petitioner had filed writ petitions earlier without disclosing the subsequent show cause notice. After the disposal of the writ petitions, the petitioner filed the present petition on similar grounds, supported by judgments of the Apex Court in related cases.

Judgment
The court noted that the petitioner had the opportunity to challenge the panchnamas during the adjudication process initiated by the show cause notice. The court found no demonstrated prejudice to the petitioner due to the searches conducted, which led to the issuance of the show cause notice. Emphasizing that the petitioner could raise all available grounds in response to the notice, the court dismissed the present petition as lacking substance and merit, without issuing notice to the other party.

---