https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=387452 The court quashed the seizure order of the petitioner's car and mobile phones, citing lack of proper authorization under Section 67(2) of the GGST Act. It emphasized the necessity of compliance with procedural requirements and ruled in favor of the petitioner, highlighting the abuse of power by the Assistant Commissioner. Despite the inclination to award costs, the petitioner declined compensation. The court ordered the immediate release of the seized items and directed communication of the ruling to the Chief Secretary for appropriate action against misuse of powers. en-us Wed, 16 Oct 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 21 Aug 2020 12:02:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=387452 The court quashed the seizure order of the petitioner's car and mobile phones, citing lack of proper authorization under Section 67(2) of the GGST Act. It emphasized the necessity of compliance with procedural requirements and ruled in favor of the petitioner, highlighting the abuse of power by the Assistant Commissioner. Despite the inclination to award costs, the petitioner declined compensation. The court ordered the immediate release of the seized items and directed communication of the ruling to the Chief Secretary for appropriate action against misuse of powers. Case-Laws GST Wed, 16 Oct 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=387452