Page 82 - GSTL_11th June 2020_Vol 37_Part 2

168 GST LAW TIMES [ Vol. 37
14. Accordingly, it is ordered that the 2nd respondent shall forthwith
release the goods and vehicle detained pursuant to the impugned Ext.P5 deten-
tion order to the petitioner on the latter furnishing bank guarantee for the value
of the amount of Rs. 20,274/- as shown in the impugned Ext.P5 detention order.
Thereafter, the 2nd respondent will immediately take steps to ensure that the
adjudication proceedings in pursuance to Ext.P5 detention order are finalized in
accordance with law and in that regard, the 2nd respondent shall issue notice of
hearing to the petitioner and will permit the petitioner to submit written submis-
sions in the matter and will thereafter afford reasonable opportunity of being
heard to the petitioner and will pass orders finalizing the adjudication proceed-
ings in pursuance to the Ext.P5 detention order, without much delay, preferably
within a period of 4 weeks from the date of production of a certified copy of this
judgment.
15. Before finalizing the said proceedings, the 2nd respondent should
meticulously and effectively consider the various contentions urged by the peti-
tioner and then pass orders finalizing the adjudication proceedings as aforestat-
ed.
16. With these observations and directions, the above W.P. (C) will
stand disposed of.
_______

2020 (37) G.S.T.L. 168 (A.P.)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR ANDHRA PRADESH AT
AMARAVATI
J.K. Maheshwari, CJ. and Ninala Jayasurya, J.
MAHENDRA KUMAR INDERMAL
Versus
DY. ASSTT. COMMR. (ST), VIJAYAWADA
Writ Petition No. 6146 of 2020, decided on 6-3-2020
Jurisdiction - Inspection, search and seizure - Form GST INS-03, which
deals with the order of Prohibition, issued to proprietor of MAT Parcel Service
premises under Section 67(2) of Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 by
an officer, i.e., 1st respondent-Deputy Assistant Commissioner (ST) without
any written authorization - Power of inspection under Section 67 ibid being
specified to an officer not below the rank of Joint Commissioner, order passed
by respondent No. 1, without reference to the order of authorization in writ-
ing, is illegal and without jurisdiction. [paras 7, 8]
Petition allowed
REPRESENTED BY : Shri Dandu Srinivas, Counsel, for the Petitioner.
[Order per : J.K. Maheshwari, CJ. (Oral)]. - Being aggrieved by the order
of Prohibition issued in Form GST INS-03, dated 21-12-2019 by the 1st respond-
ent-Deputy Assistant Commissioner (ST), Jaggaiahpet unit, Nandigama Circle,
Bhavanipuram, Vijayawada, this writ petition has been preferred.
2. Learned Counsel for the petitioner has advanced solitary contention
emphasizing the jurisdiction of the 1st respondent, who passed the order of Pro-

GST LAW TIMES  11th June 2020  82