Read the full text of the judgment/order of the Karnataka High Court in the case of Singhi Buildtech Pvt. Ltd. Vs Additional Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes Enforcement. The court clarifies the power of officers under Section 67(4) of the Goods and Services Tax (GST) Act regarding sealing or breaking premises. Get detailed analysis and conclusion.This article provides an overview of the judgment/order issued by the Karnataka High Court in the case of Singhi Buildtech Pvt. Ltd. versus Additional Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes Enforcement. The court clarifies the power of officers under Section 67(4) of the Goods and Services Tax (GST) Act regarding the sealing or breaking of premises. The analysis delves into the arguments presented by the petitioner and the response from the learned counsel for the Revenue. Finally, the conclusion highlights the court’s decision and subsequent actions. Analysis: The petitioner, Singhi Buildtech Pvt. Ltd., challenges the order issued by the respondent No.3 under Section 67(4) of the Karnataka Goods and Services Tax Act. The petitioner, a private limited company, claims to be a registered dealer under the provisions of the Act. The case revolves around the sealing of the petitioner’s premises by the respondent officers during a search operation. The petitioner argues that the sealing was done without legal authority. The petitioner’s counsel contends that the authorization order for the search was issued solely based on suspicion and does not grant the authority to seal the premises. Additionally, it is argued that Section 67(4) of the Act does not empower the respondent No.3 to seal the business premises since access was not denied by the petitioner. On the other hand, the Revenue’s counsel presents the original file, which contains an authorization issued by the Additional Commissioner of Commercial Taxes [Enforcement], South Zone, Bangalore. The authorization grants the officer, Sri J.J. Prakash, Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, the power to conduct inspection, search, and seizure of the premises in question. The court acknowledges the validity of this authorization, thus refuting the petitioner’s argument. The court refers to Section 67(4) of the Act, which empowers the authorized officer to seal or break open premises and receptacles suspected of containing goods, accounts, registers, or documents. The Revenue asserts that denial of access to the computer system and the disruption of the tally software and internet connection led to the invocation of Section 67(4) and subsequent sealing of the premises. However, the learned Additional Government Advocate, representing the respondent No.3, assures the court that the petitioner’s premises will be unsealed in the petitioner’s presence on a mutually convenient date, provided the petitioner cooperates with the inspection and search of the computer system and other records. Conclusion: After considering the arguments presented by both parties, the court orders the Revenue to unseal the premises in question on a revised date of 08.02.2019, at 11:00 a.m. The petitioner is expected to cooperate with the inspection and search of the premises, including the computer system. This judgment clarifies the power of officers under Section 67(4) of the GST Act and emphasizes the importance of lawful procedures in conducting searches and sealing premises.
Pension Fund Regulatory and Development Authority (PFRDA) invites public feedback on the proposed changes to the PFRDA (Point of Presence) Regulations 2018. Learn about the key areas of change and how it aims to simplify processes and ensure the growth of the NPS. Stakeholders can access the draft proposal on the PFRDA website and submit […]
Discussing the recent ITAT Guwahati order that dismissed a revenue appeal, citing that the tax effect involved was less than the CBDT-prescribed monetary limit. Exploring the case of ITO vs Hotchand Kalachand Loungani.
Read the amendment issued by the Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, Central Board of Direct Taxes regarding the definition of an investment fund under the Income Tax Act. The amendment clarifies the criteria for funds established or incorporated in India and regulated under SEBI or IFSCA regulations.
The weekly newsletter from the Chairman of the Central Board of Indirect Taxes & Customs (CBIC) dated 14/07/2023 highlights India’s exceptional trade facilitation ranking and showcases a traditional art form from the Tirupathi region. The newsletter also mentions significant achievements in customs operations and emphasizes the importance of supporting communities affected by extreme weather events. […]
Read the latest instruction from the Ministry of Finance and Central Pollution Control Board regarding the release of imported consignments for producers of 106 EEEs items under the E-Waste (Management) Rules, 2022.
In a recent decision, the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) found Alchemist Holdings Limited and its directors to be in non-compliance with public issue norms, thus initiating proceedings against certain non-executive directors. However, the order clarified that a non-executive director could not be deemed as an ‘officer who is in default’ if the company […]
Read the notifications from the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India (ICAI) regarding the removal of names of Chartered Accountants (CAs) due to professional misconduct. Find out the duration of removal and penalties imposed.
In today’s fast-paced and competitive business world, staying ahead of the curve is essential for success. As businesses strive to make informed decisions, having access to reliable and comprehensive data becomes a game-changer. This is where CMD Register, an Indian business intelligence and data analytics organization, comes into play.
Master circular issued by SEBI regarding guidelines for ESG Rating Providers (ERPs). Understand regulatory framework, obligations, and compliance requirements for ERPs under SEBI (Credit Rating Agencies) Regulations, 1999.
