Latest GST Judgments

For Full Access To All Latest Judgments on GST
Click Here To Subscribe Now
Take a tour of our GST Library

The presence of the lawyer is not required during the examination of the petitioner

Search & Seizure— Section 67 of the CGST Act, 2017 — Presence of Advocate--The applicant submitted that he was picked up on 07.03.2020 and was kept in illegal detention for three consecutive days. He has been beaten ruthlessly and was coerced to write incriminating statement. He therefore prayed that the presence of the Advocate be allowed at a visible yet inaudible distance of the applicant. The petitioner submitted that records of the investigation be called from the office of the respondents and the court should examine the same. The respondent relied on the judgment titled ‘Pool Pandi vs. Superintendent, Central Excise and Ors. 1992 AIR 1795 (SC)’ as well as judgment of this Court titled ‘Sudhir Kumar Aggarwal vs. Directorate General of GST Intelligence, W.P. (Crl.) 2686/2019’ dt. 06.11.19 and stated that investigation would be conducted as per law and the respondents will not adopt any such method which is not permissible by law.
Held that:-The Hon’ble High Court dismissed the application and held that in view of the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Pool Pandi’s case, no grounds are made out to allow the presence of the Advocate while questioning or examination by the officers of the respondents. — Amit Joshi Vs. Commissioner Of CEST & ST, CGST (East) & Anr. [2020] 27 TAXLOK.COM 048 (Delhi)