TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (6) TMI 256
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pectfully prayed that the Hon'ble Court may be pleased to call the record of the matter and allow the present writ petition by:- i. Issuance of a Writ in the nature of Certiorari/ Mandamus for quashing the order of sealing the four business premises of the petitioner i.e. the head office and other additional places. ii. Issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari / mandamus for quashing the DRC-22 dated 12.03.2026 and directing the respondents for de-attachment of bank accounts attached totally in violation of the provisions of the act iii. Issuance of writ in the nature of mandamus for giving the directions to the respondents for taking no coercive steps against the petitioner as petitioner are unable to appear before the authorities as every action of the respondents is above law or in contradiction to the law iv. Any other order which this Hon'ble Court deems just and proper in facts and circumstances of the case be also passed in favor of the petitioner." 3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner while placing reliance upon judgment in case of M/s. Armour Security (India) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner, CGST Delhi, East Co....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he premises was sealed and accounts were freezed. He further submitted that the petitioner has not cooperated when summons were issued and his non-cooperation have led to action in accordance with law. He further submitted that the petitioner has an option to submit entire explanation and the record to THE GST authorities for further proceedings, but he cannot maintain a writ petition under Article 226. Learned counsel has placed reliance upon judgment in case of Ankush Jain vs Union of India and others, DB civil writ petition no. 17040/2022, decided by this Court on 21.12.2022. 6. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material placed on record. Also considered the judgments as referred by learned counsel for the parties. 7. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner is a registered dealer under the provisions of the Rajasthan Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and was carrying on business as per disclosed details. On 10.03.2026, respondent nos. 3 and 4 conducted simultaneous search and operations at five premises associated with the petitioner under Section 67(2) of the CGST Act 2017. The search authorities have seized the goods lying at different premises....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Provided that where it is not practicable to seize any such goods, the proper officer, or any officer authorised by him, may serve on the owner or the custodian of the goods an order that he shall not remove, part with, 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. (3) The documents, books or things referred to in sub-section (2) or any other documents, books or things produced by a taxable person or any other person, which have not been relied upon for the issue of notice under this Act or the rules made thereunder, shall be returned to such person within a period not exceeding thirty days of the issue of the said notice. (4) The officer authorised under sub-section (2) shall have the power to seal or break open the door of any premises or to break open any almirah, electronic devices, box, receptacle in which any goods, accounts, registers or documents of the person are suspected to be concealed, where acce....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r reasons to be recorded in writing, seize the accounts, registers or documents of such person produced before him and shall grant a receipt for the same, and shall retain the same for so long as may be necessary in connection with any proceedings under this Act or the rules made thereunder for prosecution. (12) The Commissioner or an officer authorised by him may cause purchase of any goods or services or both by any person authorised by him from the business premises of any taxable person, to check the issue of tax invoices or bills of supply by such taxable person, and on return of goods so purchased by such officer, such taxable person or any person in charge of the business premises shall refund the amount so paid towards the goods after cancelling any tax invoice or bill of supply issued earlier." 9. Chapter XIV of the CGST Act deals with the provision relating to inspection, search, seizure and arrest. As per Section 67(2), the proper officer not below the rank of Joint Commissioner can authorize in writing any other officer to inspect, if he has "reason to believe" a taxable person or any person engaged in business of transporting goods or an owner or an operato....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ave any jurisdiction in view of Section 6(2)(b) of CGST Act. Hon'ble Supreme Court, while considering the submissions, has decided the subject, especially by summarizing the final conclusion in following paragraph: 96. We summarize our final conclusion as under:- i. Clause (b) of sub-section (2) of Section 6 of the CGST Act and the equivalent State enactments bars the "initiation of any proceedings" on the "same subject matter". ii. Any action arising from the audit of accounts or detailed scrutiny of returns must be initiated by the tax administration to which the taxpayer is assigned. iii. Intelligence based enforcement action can be initiated by any one of the Central or the State tax administrations despite the taxpayer having been assigned to the other administration. iv. Parallel proceedings should not be initiated by other tax administration when one of the tax administrations has already initiated intelligence-based enforcement action. v. All actions that are initiated as a measure for probing an inquiry or gathering of evidence or information do not constitute "proceedings" within the meaning of Section 6(2)(b) of t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... to verify the veracity of the assessee's claim. We say, so as this course of action would obviate needless duplication of proceedings and ensure optimal utilization of the Department's time, effort, and resources, bearing in mind that action initiated by one authority enures to benefit of all. d. If the claim of the taxable person regarding the overlap of inquiries is found untenable, and the investigations of the two authorities pertain to different "subject matters", an intimation to this effect, along with the reasons and a specification of the distinct subject matters, shall be immediately conveyed in writing to the taxable person. e. The taxing authorities are well within their rights to conduct an inquiry or investigation until it is ascertained that both authorities are examining the identical liability to be discharged, the same contravention alleged, or the issuance of a show cause notice. Any show cause notice issued in respect of a liability already covered by an existing show cause notice shall be quashed. f. However, if the Central or the State tax authority, as the case may be finds that the matter being inquired into or investigated by it ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ancing the objectives of harmony and cooperative federalism. 12. Learned counsel for petitioner has only placed reliance upon Section 6(2)(b) of CGST Act for the expression that initiation of any proceedings refers to formal commencement of adjudicatory proceeding by way of issuance of show cause notice and it does not encompass the process of summons or conduct of any search or seizure. The provision of Section 6(2)(b) is reproduced as under: "where a proper officer under the State Goods and Services Tax Act or the Union Territory Goods and Services Tax Act has initiated any proceedings on a subject matter, no proceedings shall be initiated by the proper officer under this Act on the same subject matter." 13. The petitioner has not mentioned any specific fact to show that the petitioner was ever investigated by any of the authority on similar grounds including for ITC claims. Section 6 of CGST Act provides for authorization of officers of State Tax or Union Territory Tax as officer in certain circumstances. Section 6(2)(b) is applicable when a proper officer under the State Goods and Services Tax Act has initiated any proceedings on a matter of search conducted on p....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y Hon'ble Supreme Court) with reference to expression "reason to believe", and after considering several judgments, the Delhi High Court has dismissed the writ petition. 18. Section 67(4) provides that the officer authorized shall have the duty to seal or break open the door of any premises, which means respondent no. 3 has a duty to act in accordance with the provision under Section 67 of CGST Act. Section 67(6) of CGST Act provides that the goods so seized shall be released on a provisional basis, and Rules 140 and 141 have been considered in case of State of Uttar Pradesh and Ors. Vs. M/s Kay Pan Fragrance Pvt. Ltd. (supra) by Hon'ble Supreme Court. 19. No material is placed on record to show that the petitioner has ever filed any application by invoking the provision under Section 67(4) and (6) for release of goods or de-sealing of premises. Section 83 of CGST Act authorizes the Commissioner to act to protect the interest of the government revenue. The circular dated 21.02.2021 provides for guidelines for attachment of property and the petitioner has failed to point out any flaw in the attachment process initiated by respondents while issuing order of attachment dated....