https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=390559 Petitions challenged a GST seizure order, repeated summons and bank account attachment, and also questioned the scope of investigation under the CGST Act, including procedure for alleged offences under section 132 and the need for CrPC safeguards. The High Court recorded that the enquiry was still ongoing, accepted the petitioners' statement that they would join the enquiry and produce required documents, and directed the respondents to file a reply within four weeks. It also ordered that no coercive action be taken against the petitioners until the next date. en-us Tue, 10 Dec 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 15 Mar 2025 13:21:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=390559 Petitions challenged a GST seizure order, repeated summons and bank account attachment, and also questioned the scope of investigation under the CGST Act, including procedure for alleged offences under section 132 and the need for CrPC safeguards. The High Court recorded that the enquiry was still ongoing, accepted the petitioners' statement that they would join the enquiry and produce required documents, and directed the respondents to file a reply within four weeks. It also ordered that no coercive action be taken against the petitioners until the next date. Case-Laws GST Tue, 10 Dec 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=390559