Search and seizure u/s 67(2) CGST Act held procedurally defective; HC judgment upheld as unlawful, SLP dismissed

Whether the statutory prerequisites for exercising search and seizure under Section 67(2) of the CGST Act were satisfied: the HC concluded the impugned search and seizure by the CGST Commissionerate lacked the requisite statutory ingredients and declared it unlawful - the SC declined to interfere with that judgment while expressly leaving the broader question of law open; the HC's observations in the writ were stated not to prejudice ongoing adjudication proceedings, and the Special Leave Petition was dismissed.

---

---

Issues involved:
The Supreme Court declined to interfere with the impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court, keeping the question of law open and stating that the observations made in the writ petition will not impact the adjudication proceedings.

Summary:

Issue 1 - Interference with High Court Judgment:
The Supreme Court, after hearing the counsel for both parties, decided not to interfere with the impugned judgment and order issued by the High Court. The Court maintained its stance on this matter.

Issue 2 - Question of Law:
While upholding the High Court's decision, the Supreme Court kept the question of law open for further consideration. This indicates that the legal issue in question remains unresolved and subject to future examination.

Issue 3 - Observations in Writ Petition:
The Court clarified that the observations made in the writ petition will not impact the ongoing adjudication proceedings. This ensures that the statements or remarks in the petition will not influence the final decision-making process.

Conclusion:
Consequently, the Special Leave Petition was dismissed by the Supreme Court, and any pending applications were deemed disposed of as per the Court's decision.

---