^®
TaxReply India Private Limited

GST Library

Best GST Library

Subscription Plans

TaxGPT

GST News | Updates

GST Calendar

GST Case Laws

GST Case Laws Sitemap

GST Notifications, Circulars, Releases etc.

Act & Rules

Act & Rules (Multi-view)

GST Rates

HSN Codes ^New

GST Forms

GST Diary

GST Notebook

GST Fees Manager

GST Council Meetings

GST Set-off Calculator

ITC Reversal Calculator

E-invoice Calculator

Inverted Duty Calculator

GSTR-3B Manual

GSTR-9 Manual

GSTR-9C Manual

Full Site Search

E-way Bill

Finance Bill

GST e-books

TaxReply Support

YouTube Videos

Twitter

Buy Premium Tax Domains

About Us

Our Services

🔒

TaxReply India Pvt Ltd

🔒

^®

Subscribe Free GST updates on...

Subscribe to Best GST Library of India and get ahead of the rest. Click here for plans. | GST Act & Rules e-book Click here. |

KRISHNA CHAURASIA vs. ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR GENERAL, DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF GST INTELLIGENCE & OTHERS
(Delhi High Court)

Hon'ble Judges:

VIBHU BAKHRU
SACHIN DATTA

Pet. Counsel

Anjali Jha Manish

Priyadarshi Manish

Divya Rastogi

Res. Counsel

Jatin Kumar Gaur

Harpreet Singh

Petitioner / Applicant	KRISHNA CHAURASIA
Respondent	ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR GENERAL, DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF GST INTELLIGENCE & OTHERS
Court	Delhi High Court
State	Delhi
Date	Sep 6, 2024
Order No.	W. P. (C) 2493/2024
Citation	2024(9) TAXREPLY 10796
Add to Favorites	Add to favorites.
Download Original Order
Print (Full Page)
Print (Judgement Only)

Related Tags :

☍

Section 67

TaxGPT ^Beta

Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

Listen this case in simple words

Audio Timeline

Audio Speed:

AA |

ORDER
ORDER 1. The petitioner has filed the present petition, inter alia, praying that directions be issued to the respondents to release the sum of ₹27,00,000/- which was seized pursuant to a Seizure Memo dated 17.04.2023. The learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to a copy of panchnama dated 17.04.2023, which has been annexed along with the counter affidavit filed by the respondents. The same records that the sum of ₹27,00,000/- in cash was found at the office premises of the petitioner and since no satisfactory answer or evidence was furnished by him regarding the source of the aforesaid cash, the same was ‘resumed’ by the officer. 2. It is the petitioner’s case that the said seizure was without authority of law. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner further states that the said issue is squarely covered by the decision of this Court in Deepak Khandelwal Proprietor M/s. Shri Shyam Metal v. Commissioner of CGST, Delhi West & An....