M/S Swiss Bake Ingredients PVT. LTD. vs. State Of U.P. And 3 Others

Facts

M/s Swiss Bake Ingredients Pvt. Ltd. (Petitioner) filed a writ petition challenging the inspection, search, and seizure proceedings initiated under Section 67 of the UPGST Act by respondent authorities. The Petitioner specifically challenged the seizure order dated 05.01.2022 and the accompanying panchnama, arguing the seizure was made without proper authorization from the Joint Commissioner. The Petitioner also contended that the goods were not weighed and videography was not conducted as per specific Circulars of the Commissioner, Commercial Tax. The Petitioner had submitted a reply to a summon dated 07.01.2022, but the seized goods remained unreleased. The State (Respondent) argued that the Joint Commissioner had authorized the inspection team by an order dated 04.01.2022. The State admitted that videography was not done as per the Circulars but stated that an order for release of seized goods would be passed by the competent authority within a time-bound period if no such order had been issued.

Held

The Court held that the seizure was made after due authorization by the Joint Commissioner, and therefore, the seizure was not unauthorized and could not be quashed. Regarding the weighment and release of seized goods, the Court noted that the Petitioner had already submitted a reply to the authority. The Court granted liberty to the Petitioner to move a fresh application for the release of seized goods under Section 67 of the CGST/UPGST Act, 2017, within one week from the date of the order, along with a copy of the order. Upon submission of such an application, the competent authority was directed to consider it and pass an appropriate, speaking, and reasoned order in accordance with the law, after affording the Petitioner a reasonable opportunity of hearing. The Court explicitly stated that it had not expressed any opinion on the merits of the Petitioner's case. The writ petition was disposed of with these observations.

Key Issues

1. Whether the inspection, search, and seizure proceedings initiated under Section 67 of the UPGST Act were conducted without proper authorization from the Joint Commissioner, rendering them void? (Question of law, turning on Section 67 of the UPGST Act). Petitioner's arguments: The seizure was made without authorization from the Joint Commissioner under Section 67(1)/(2) of the CGST/UPGST Act, 2017. The inspecting team failed to weigh the seized goods and conduct videography, contrary to Computer Circular No.1819012 dated 24.05.2018 and Computer Circular No.1819030 dated 30.08.2018. Respondent's arguments: The Joint Commissioner had issued an order dated 04.01.2022 authorizing the inspecting team for search. The Respondent admitted the absence of videography as per the Circulars but stated that the application for release of seized goods would be considered by the competent authority within a time-bound period.