2021 (3) TMI 1086

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ice on behalf of respondent nos.2 to 4 (the contesting respondents) 2.2 Mr. Singh and Mr. Narayan say that they do not wish to file counter-affidavit(s) and reply(ies) in view of the order that we propose to pass in the instant writ petition. 3. The instant writ petition is directed against the prohibition order dated 15.03.2021 passed by respondent no.3. 3.1 A perusal of the order shows that the inspection under Section 67(1) and (2) of the Central Goods and Services Act, 2017 [hereafter referred to as the "Act"] was carried out at the petitioner's premises located at B/24, Okhla Industrial Area, Phase-II, New Delhi-110020. 4. It is the case of respondent nos. 2 to 4 that the inspection revealed that there was a mismatch between the go....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....in paragraph 14 of the statement. Mr. Narayan says that paragraph 14 of the statement of Mr. Agarwal adverts to the fact that the variation between the physical stock and that which stood recorded in register was worth approximately Rs. 3.00 crores. 6.2 Besides this, Mr. Narayan says that the petitioner is entitled in law to approach respondent nos.2 to 4 under the provisions of Section 67(6) of the Act to seek release of the goods, albeit, on provisional basis, subject to fulfilment of the conditions contained therein. 7. In rejoinder, Ms. Lakshmikumaran says that the basic ingredient for exercise of power in this case was missing, i.e., there was no formation of opinion by the concerned authority that he had reason to believe that the g....