Gunjan Bindal And Anr. Vs Commissioner of CGST
Date: November 16, 2023
Subject Matter
Revenue Department does not have the power to seize cash under Section 67 of the CGST Act
Summary
In the case of Gunjan Bindal and Anr. vs. Commissioner of CGST, Delhi West and Ors., the Delhi High Court disposed of the writ petition and directed the Revenue Department to remit the amount of cash seized, along with interest, holding that the Revenue Department does not have the power to seize cash under Section 67 of the CGST Act. The petitioners' residential premises were searched, and cash amounting to Rs.1,15,00,000/- along with other articles were found and seized by the Revenue Department. The court held that the Revenue Department's action was not supported by the law and directed the remittance of the seized amount to the petitioner's bank account along with accrued interest.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF DELHI HIGH COURT
1. The petitioners have filed the present petition, inter alia, praying that respondents be directed to release an aggregate amount of ₹1,15,00,000/- resumed/seized by respondent no.2.
2. The petitioners are brothers residing in separate floors of a building bearing the address 71, Engineers Enclave, Pitampura, Saraswati Vihar, New Delhi-110034. On 18.01.2020, a search was conducted at the residential premises of the petitioners under Section 67 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (hereafter ‘the CGST Act’). The panchnama drawn by respondents indicates that amongst other articles, cash amounting to ₹14,50,000/- (Rupees Fourteen Lacs Fifty Thousand only) was found in the bedroom of petitioner no.1 located on the second floor of the premises, and cash amounting to ₹1,00,50,000/- (Rupees One Crore Fifty Thousand only) was found from the bedroom of petitioner no.2 located on the fourth floor. The panchnama further records that since the petitioners were unable to provide any satisfactory explanation or any documentary evidence to support the source of the cash, the officers resumed the cash on the belief that it had resulted from unlawful activity or was sale proceeds of goods without proper accounting.
3. Thereafter, the petitioners repeatedly requested the respondents for release of the said amount but the said cash has not been released.
4. The petitioners contend that the concerned officers had no power to seize cash under Section 67 of the CGST Act on the ground that the same was not satisfactorily explained. Concededly, the issue is covered by the earlier decisions of this Court in Deepak Khandelwal Proprietor M/s Shri Shyam Metal v. Commissioner of CGST, Delhi West & Anr.: 2023: DHC: 5823-DB and Rajeev Chhatwal v. Commissioner of Goods and Services Tax (East): 2023: DHC: 6060-DB.
5. Accordingly, the present petition is required to be allowed and the respondents are liable to refund the money seized.
6. The respondents state that the amounts so seized has been kept in a fixed deposit bearing interest.
7. Respondent no.2 is, accordingly, directed to remit the amount of ₹14,50,000/- along with accrued interest to the bank account of petitioner no.1, and remit ₹1,00,50,000/- along with accrued interest to the bank account of petitioner no.2.
8. The details of the bank accounts shall be provided by the petitioners to respondent no.2 within a period of one week from today. The respondents are directed to remit the amounts to the said bank accounts, as aforesaid, within a period of two weeks thereafter.
9. It is clarified that this would not preclude the Income Tax Department or any other authority from taking necessary steps in regard to the petitioners possessing such cash. Respondents are also not precluded from taking such steps under the relevant statute in accordance with law.