2023 (11) TMI 208

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....2nd respondent. 2. Intelligence Officer, Intelligence Unit of the State Goods and Services Tax Department Kerala, Kottarakkara, conducted a search at the business premises of M/s Sobhana Jewellery, Main Road Ottappalam, Palakkad. The search took place on 26.05.2023 at 3.00 p.m. after the authorisation was given by the Joint Commissioner under Section 67(2) of the Kerala State Goods and Services Tax Act/Central Goods and Services Tax Act 2017 (for short, 'SGST/CGST Act 2017'). After conducting the search operation, a Mahazar was prepared. The business premises of M/s Sobhana Jewellery consist of a two-storeyed building. During the search of the first floor, it was seen that some gold ornaments were kept in a bag. Sri Jaleesh A and Sri Raju,....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....son present at the premises of the M/s Sobhana Jewellery, was one of the Partners of the petitioner and Sri Raju was an employee of the Firm. 2.3 Finding discrepancies and violations of Rule 56(17) of the SGST/CGST Rules 2017, as well as Rule 55 of the SGST/CGST Rules 2017, the show cause notice was issued to the petitioner demanding penalty in lieu of confiscation of goods payable at Rs. 91,70,954/-. The petitioner was given 15 days' time to file a reply and to remain present for a personal hearing on 27.07.2023 at 11.00 a.m. at the Office of the Intelligence Officer, Unit 3, SGST Department, Edappally. The petitioner submitted its reply on 14.08.2023 in Ext.P7. 2.4 The said show cause notice was adjudicated by the Intelligence Officer v....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....or otherwise deal with the goods except with the previous permission of such officer: PROVIDED FURTHER that the documents or books or things so seized shall be retained by such officer only for so long as may be necessary for their examination and for any inquiry or proceedings under this Act." 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there was no authorisation in respect of the jewellery items of the petitioner, which were seized from the premises of M/s Sobhana Jewellery. Sub-section (2) of Section 67 contemplates three aspects for seizing the articles, that too with the prior permission of the Officer not below the rank of Joint Commissioner which are: (i) there has to be reasons to believe that any goods, documents, books....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....finding of fact and of record that the search operation was authorised under Section 67(2) of the SGST/CGST Act 2017 in Form INS 01 issued by the Joint Commissioner of State Tax, INA Thiruvananthapuram. The petitioner's gold jewellery items were also found stored in a bag at the premises of M/s Sobhana Jewellery. The contention of the petitioner that there was no authorisation for the seizure of 1647.970 grams of gold, the property of the petitioner, does not merit consideration as there was authorisation for the search of the premises of M/s Sobhana Jewellery and these gold items, which the petitioner had later on claimed ownership, was found in a bag in the premises of M/s Sobhana Jewellery. 5.2 There cannot be authorisation in respe....