Page 76 - GSTL_ 28th May 2020_Vol 36_Part 4

522 GST LAW TIMES [ Vol. 36
“Mr. Chetan Pandya, Learned Advocate for the petitioner has vehemently
assailed the action of the respondents by submitting that the officers of the
respondents have camped inside the house of the petitioner since 11-10-
2019 wherein his family members are residing and that the family members
of the petitioner are virtually under house arrest. Issue notice returnable on
21st October, 2019. Direct service is permitted today.”
16.10 Thereafter, on 18-10-2019, at 4:30 pm, it is recorded that at the site
upon hearing the recording from the mobile phone of Pareshbhai’s mother, in
her recording (7-10-2010, 6:52 pm) of 4 minutes 13 seconds it could be heard that
the office record was kept at Harishbhai’s house, after which it was transferred to
the house next door where a single person was residing which was being said by
his wife, and his mother was saying that the record which was inside the house
was kept at Munni’s house (Pinkyben Gohil). Hence, officer A.L. Rabari obtained
summons and went to the said place to record statement. At 5:20, it is recorded
that at the search place, as Pareshbhai’s wife was required to go to fetch vegeta-
bles and get the grains ground at the flour mill, with the consent of the officer she
was given permission to fetch such things and she had gone and returned in 0:45
minutes (time 5:20 pm.). Lastly, at 7:40 it is recorded that upon the officer of the
search premises Shri A. L. Rabari returning from the said place along with one
panch whom he had taken, he had informed that he had gone with a summons
to the address - 102, Mira Madhav Apartment, First Floor, in the lane of Ashapu-
ra Mataji Temple, Vejalpur, Ahmedabad to Hareshbhai Vandra’s place and after
serving summons on him it was explained to him and his statement was record-
ed and he was made to hear the recording found at the searched place in the con-
text of which he had stated that the books of account were kept in the house next
door to the office, which was informed to the higher officer and after obtaining a
warrant from the head office they had come to that place and after showing them
the said documents they had returned (time 7:40 pm).
16.11 It is further recorded that after coming to the searched place, up-
on asking the family members of Pareshbhai Chauhan as to whether they had
received any news about Pareshbhai, they had stated that till then they had not
received any news about him. Since the books of accounts of Pareshbhai Chau-
han’s office were found from some other place, the higher officer was informed
about it. The intention behind staying at that place and searching the place was
that Pareshbhai remains present and produces the books of account. Out of
which, a part of his accounting record having been found from some other place,
the higher officer was informed and after recording the last statement of
Pareshbhai Chauhan’s father Nathabhai Chauhan, the search of the residential
premises was completed at 9:15 hours at night.
17. This, in sum and substance is the nature of the proceedings con-
ducted by the respondents from 11-10-2019 to 18-10-2019 at the residential prem-
ises of the petitioner.
18. The entire action of the search party after the first day, i.e. from 12-
10-2019 to 18-10-2019, was, therefore, illegal, invalid and not backed by any pro-
vision of the GST Acts. Moreover, it is only after this court issued notice on 18-
10-2019, that the search was brought to an end on the ground that from the re-
cording of the petitioner’s mother of 7-10-2019, they could find out the place
where certain accounting record was secreted. In this regard, it may be noted

GST LAW TIMES  28th May 2020  76