https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=446608 HC upheld the legality of the search and inspection under Section 67(1)(a) CGST Act, holding that "reasons to believe" require only rational, relevant material and that sufficiency of such reasons is not justiciable. The information that petitioner purchased goods from a non-existent supplier provided adequate basis to infer wrongful ITC availment; hence, the inspection by central officers was not illegal, nor barred by Section 6(2)(b) CGST Act despite earlier DGST action. However, HC directed refund of Rs. 10,00,000 voluntarily deposited in FORM GST DRC-03. Petition disposed. en-us Tue, 05 Dec 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 12 Dec 2025 14:34:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=446608 HC upheld the legality of the search and inspection under Section 67(1)(a) CGST Act, holding that "reasons to believe" require only rational, relevant material and that sufficiency of such reasons is not justiciable. The information that petitioner purchased goods from a non-existent supplier provided adequate basis to infer wrongful ITC availment; hence, the inspection by central officers was not illegal, nor barred by Section 6(2)(b) CGST Act despite earlier DGST action. However, HC directed refund of Rs. 10,00,000 voluntarily deposited in FORM GST DRC-03. Petition disposed. Case-Laws GST Tue, 05 Dec 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=446608