Page 59 - GSTL_ 28th May 2020_Vol 36_Part 4

2020 ] PARESH NATHALAL CHAUHAN v. STATE OF GUJARAT 505
5. Thus, sub-section (2) of Section 67 of the CGST Act empowers the au-
thorised officer to search and seize goods, documents or books or things.
Sub-section (4) of Section 67 empowers the officer authorised under sub-
section (2) to seal or break open door of any premises or to break open any
almirah, electronic devices, box, receptacle in which any goods, accounts,
registers or documents of the person are suspected to be concealed, where
access to such premises, almirah, electronic devices, box or receptacle is de-
nied. Thus, the officers concerned were authorised to seize such books,
goods, documents, or things which were found at the premises. Sub-section
(2) of Section 67 does not empower the officer concerned to record state-
ments of family members through force or coercion or to record their con-
versations in their mobile phones. In exercise of powers under sub-section
(2) of Section 67 of the CGST Act, it is not permissible for the authorised of-
ficer to use coercive measures against family members to find out the
whereabouts of the taxable person. It is shocking to see that in a premises
where there are three ladies, namely, the petitioner’s mother, wife and
young daughter, male officers together with a CRPF Officer have stayed
throughout day and night despite the fact that the goods, articles and
things were already seized on 11-10-2019. The entire exercise carried out by
the concerned officers from 12-10-2019 to 18-10-2019 was totally without
any authority of law and in flagrant disregard of the provisions of the Act
and the rules and in total abuse of the powers vested in them under the Act.
The manner in which the officers have conducted themselves by overreach-
ing the process of law and acting beyond the powers vested in them under
sub-section (2) of Section 67 of the CGST Act needs to be deprecated in the
strictest terms. Therefore, a proper inquiry needs to be made in respect of
the action of the respondent officers of staying day and night at the premis-
es of the petitioner without any authority of law.
6. In the aforesaid premises, the first respondent Commissioner of State
Tax, Ahmedabad shall carry out a proper inquiry in the matter and submit
a report before this court on or before 13th November, 2019.
7. Stand over to 13th November, 2019.
8. Registry to forthwith forward a copy of this order to the Commissioner
of State Tax as well as Chief Secretary of the State to look into the matter
and do the needful to ensure that such incidents are not repeated.”
3. Thereafter, on request made by the Learned Government Pleader,
time was granted to place the report in compliance with the above order and the
matter was adjourned to 20-11-2019.
4. On 20-11-2019, this court passed the following order :
“1. Ms. Manisha L. Shah, Learned Government Pleader has tendered a re-
port of inquiry made by the Chief Commissioner of State Tax, Gujarat State,
Ahmedabad in compliance with the directions issued by this court vide or-
der dated 25-10-2019.
2. Upon perusal of the report, it emerges that it is no better than the earlier
report dated 20-10-2019 submitted by the Assistant Commissioner of State
Tax, and does not meet with the directions issued by this court in letter and
spirit. It appears that the Chief Commissioner of G.S.T. has taken a very le-
nient view in the matter and instead of examining the action of the con-
cerned officers in the context of the relevant provisions of the Goods & Ser-
vices Tax Act, has tried to justify the action of the concerned officers, which
is required to be deprecated in the strictest terms.
GST LAW TIMES  28th May 2020  59