The respondents are directed to release the goods on taking personal bond
Section 67 of the CGST Act, 2017 — Search & Seizure – The petitioner is a dealer registered, who imports toys from China and purchases goods from Delhi-based dealers. The respondent on 21.08.2020, conducted search of the petitioner's place of business and documents and goods were seized. The petitioner challenged the orders of seizure and prohibition issued on 21.08.2020. The petitioner submitted there was absolutely no reason to believe that he had indulged in suppression or otherwise contravened any of the provisions of the Act. The respondents conducted the search without any reasonable basis and relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in AIR 1976 SC 1753 (Income Tax Officer, Calcutta and Ors. vs. Lakhmani Mewal Das). The respondent submitted that the petitioner was evading GST by mis-declaring the China’s origin plastic toys as non electric toys and paying 12% IGST on the imported goods in place of 18% IGST leviable on such imported toys. The search operation was conducted with proper authorisation granted under Section 67(2) of the Act. On the day huge quantity of the chinese origin toys stocked in the petitioner's premises were found unaccounted. The court observed that the respondents ought to release the goods on provisional basis.
Held that:- The Hon’ble High Court partly allowed the petition and directed the respondents to release the goods on taking personal bond from him and on payment of a sum of Rs. 2.00 lakhs.