Sonali Bikram Bakshi And Anr. vs. The Commissioner Central Tax CGST Delhi West And Anr.
Facts
The petitioners, Sonali Bikram Bakshi and another, filed a writ petition before the Delhi High Court challenging a sealing order dated July 9, 2024, passed by the Commissioner Central Tax CGST Delhi West (Respondent No. 1) under Section 67(4) of the CGST Act, 2017. The sealing order pertained to premises associated with Pineview Technology Private Limited, identified by GSTIN No. 07AAICP6967G1ZX. The petitioners also challenged the accompanying Panchnama dated July 9, 2024, and sought directions for the de-sealing of their flat located at A-34, Panchvati Apartments, Near F-Block, Vikaspuri, Delhi. Subsequent to the filing of the petition, the premises in question were de-sealed.
Held
The Court noted that after the present petition was filed, the premises in question had been de-sealed. Consequently, the prayers impugning the sealing order dated July 9, 2024, and the Panchnama dated July 9, 2024, were rendered infructuous. Regarding the prayer for compensation for alleged illegal actions by Respondent No. 1, the Court considered it not apposite to adjudicate this claim within the present writ petition. The Court explicitly left it open for the petitioners to pursue other remedies in this regard, if they were so advised. The petition was disposed of in light of these observations.
Key Issues
1. Whether the sealing order dated July 9, 2024, passed by Respondent No. 1 under Section 67(4) of the CGST Act, 2017, was valid and justified, and if not, whether it should be quashed. 2. Whether the petitioners are entitled to compensation for alleged illegal actions by Respondent No. 1. Petitioner's Arguments: The petitioners sought to quash the sealing order and Panchnama, and prayed for the de-sealing of their premises. They contended that the actions of Respondent No. 1 were illegal. Revenue's Arguments: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the revenue or state. However, the fact that the premises were de-sealed after the petition was filed suggests a potential concession or change in the revenue's stance regarding the sealing.
Sections Cited
Section 67(4)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
O R D E R
Exemption is allowed, subject to just exceptions. CM APPL.38640/2024 (Exemption)
The application stands disposed of.
The petitioner has filed the present petition inter-alia praying as under: CM APPL.38641/2024 (for directions) “a) Call for the records in relation to the Pineview Technology Private Limited maintained by the Respondent No. 1 in respect of GSTIN No.07 AAICP6967G I ZX from October 2023 till date; b) Pass an order I direction I Writ quashing the Impugned Sealing Order dated 09 July 2024 (Annexure P - 1) passed by the Respondent No. 1 under Section 67 (4) of the COST Act, 2017 along with the Panchnama dated 09 July 2024 (Annexure P - 2); c) As a consequential relief, pass an order I direction I writ directi
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the Delhi High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.