The Madhya Pradesh High Court while analyzing the scope and ambit of section 67(2) of GST Act has upheld Cash seizure of about Rs. 66.43 lakhs.
The petitioner is the wife of Shri Sanjay Matta who is the Proprietor of the firm functioning in the name and style of M/s. S. S. Enterprises. The Firm is in the business of Confectionery and Pan Masala items.
The petitioner has further stated that search operation was carried out by respondent, Senior Intelligence Officer, DGGSTI, Indore at the business premises as well as residential premises and a Panchnama was drawn. The respondents have also seized an amount to the tune of Rs.66 Lakhs as per the Punchnama prepared by them.
The documents and cash were seized in terms of Section 67(2) of the CGST Act, 2017 and the Order of Seizure in Form GST INS-02 was issued. It has also been stated that Shri Sanjay Matta, the husband of the petitioner, made a voluntary statement stating categorically that the said cash of Rs.66,43,130/- was the sale proceeds of the illegally sold Pan Masala without payment of GST.
The petitioner has vehemently argued that the respondent has got no power vested under Section 67(2) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (CGST Act, 2017) to effect seizure of cash amount from the petitioner nor from her husband.
It was further argued by the petitioner that the cash cannot be treated as “Document, Book or Things” as per the definition under the definition clause of the CGST Act, 2017 and therefore, the respondents be directed to release the cash, which they have seized.
The respondents have stated that keeping in view Section 67(2) of the CGST Act, 2017 read with definition Clause makes it very clear that the respondents were justified in seizing the amount from the petitioner and the statute empowers them to do so. The respondents have also submitted the Case Diary in a sealed cover before this Court. The division judge bench of Justice S.C. Sharma and Justice Shailendra Shukla keeping in view the totality of the circumstances of the case, the material available in the case diary and also keeping in view Section 67(2) of the CGST Act, 2017, opined that the authorities have rightly seized the amount from the husband of the petitioner and unless and until the investigation is carried out and the matter is finally adjudicated, the question of releasing the amount does not arise.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the Judgment
