https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=792875 In GST search and seizure matters, the High Court noted that where the assessee does not cooperate with summons, remains absent during investigation, and fails to use statutory remedies for release of seized goods or de-sealing, interference under Article 226 is ordinarily unwarranted. The Court treated the sealing of business premises, seizure action under Section 67, and provisional bank-account attachment under Section 83 as measures within the statutory framework, and found no legal infirmity on the facts. A plea based on Section 6(2)(b) was held inapplicable. The writ challenge to the departmental action was therefore rejected and the petition dismissed without costs. en-us Mon, 20 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 04 Jun 2026 15:56:21 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=792875 In GST search and seizure matters, the High Court noted that where the assessee does not cooperate with summons, remains absent during investigation, and fails to use statutory remedies for release of seized goods or de-sealing, interference under Article 226 is ordinarily unwarranted. The Court treated the sealing of business premises, seizure action under Section 67, and provisional bank-account attachment under Section 83 as measures within the statutory framework, and found no legal infirmity on the facts. A plea based on Section 6(2)(b) was held inapplicable. The writ challenge to the departmental action was therefore rejected and the petition dismissed without costs. Case-Laws GST Mon, 20 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=792875