Jayesh Karandas Chande vs. The Additional Director-General
Original PDF →Facts
The Respondent seized cash of Rs. 6,00,000/- from the Petitioner during search and seizure operations under Section 67(2) of the CGST Act. The Petitioner argued that cash cannot be considered "Things" under Section 67(2), citing a previous High Court judgment.
Held
The Court held that cash seized cannot be construed as "Things" within the meaning of Section 67(2) of the CGST Act, following its own prior decision. Consequently, the seized cash must be returned to the petitioner.
Key Issues
Whether cash seized during search and seizure operations can be considered "Things" under Section 67(2) of the CGST Act.
Sections Cited
Section 67(2)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORAL ORDER
In this Petition, Petitioner seeks the following reliefs:
a) Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other writ/ to direct the Respondent to forthwith release / refund / return the cash of Rs. 6,00,000/- to the Petitioner.
b) Grant such other order or direction as deemed fit in the facts and circumstances of the case in the interest of justice.”
A perusal of the material on record will indicate that on 12.04.2022, the Respondent conducted search & seizure operations at the premises of the Petitioner by invoking Section 67(2) of the Central Goods Sales Tax Act, 2017 (“CGST Act” for short). During the course of the search and seizure proceedings, in addition to other documents, goods, etc., the Respondent also seized cash belonging to the Petitioner in a sum of Rs.6,00,000/- from the Petitioner. It is submitted that Petitioner has addressed representations dated 14.06.2022 and 13.02.2024 to the Respondent intimating that the cash seized by the it could not be described, construed or treated as “Things” within the meaning of Section 67(2) of the CGST Act, as held by this Court by order dated 20.02.2024 in W.P. No.25864/2023 (T-RES) between “B NC: 2024:KHC:37279 KUSUMA POONACHA & ANOTHER and SENIOR INTELLIGENCE OFFICER
DIRECTOR GENERAL OF GST INTELLIGENCE (DGGI), BANGALORE ZONAL UNIT (BZU) & OTHERS”, disposed of on 20.02.2024. It is therefore submitted that necessary directions be issued to the Respondent to refund/repay/return forthwith the seized cash back to the Petitioner at the earliest, without any delay.
Per contra, learned counsel for the Respondent would submit that there is no merit in the Petition and the same is liable to be dismissed.
As rightly contended by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that in KUSUMA POONACHA supra, this Court has already come to the conclusion that the expression “Things” as contemplated under Section 67(2) of the CGST Act does not include money/cash seized from the Petitioner during the course of search and seizure operations. While arriving at the said conclusion, this Court has held as under: ORDER
“(i) Petition is hereby allowed. NC: 2024:KHC:37279 (ii) The impugned order at Annexure-A2 dated 21.09.2022 passed by 1st respondent is hereby set aside.
(iii) The concerned respondents are directed to refund / repay/ return the entire subject sum / cash of Rs.1,71,07,500/- seized from the premises of the petitioner No.1 on 20/21.09.2022 together with accrued interest back to the petitioners within a period of three weeks from today.
(iv) It is however clarified that the respondents are not precluded from instituting or continuing any other proceedings in accordance with law.”
Therefore, the judgment of this Court in KUSUMA POONACHA supra is directly and squarely applicable to the facts of the instant case and consequently, the present Petition deserves to be disposed of in the same terms issuing directions to the Respondent to refund/repay/return the cash amounting to Rs.6,00,000/- seized from the Petitioner.
In the above circumstances, this Court makes the following: ORDER (i) Petition is hereby allowed. NC: 2024:KHC:37279 (ii) The impugned order at Annexure-A dated 12.04.2022 passed by Respondent is hereby set aside.
(iii) The concerned Respondent is directed to refund / repay/ return the entire subject sum / cash of Rs.6,00,000/- seized from the premises of the petitioner on 12.04.2022 together with accrued interest back to the Petitioner immediately after the receipt of copy of this order.
(iv) It is however clarified that the Respondent is not precluded from instituting or continuing any other proceedings in accordance with law.” (S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE
Bsv List No.: 2 Sl No.: 0
Reproduced from the public record of the Karnataka High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.