Case Reference
Rohit Gupta and Ors. v. Commissioner of CGST, Delhi West and Ors.
High Court of Delhi at New Delhi
W.P.(C) 13717/2023
Date of Judgment: 10.11.2023
Relevant Section: Section 67, CGST Act, 2017
Category of Dispute: Seizure of cash during search proceedings
Facts (Paras 1–2)
The petitioners approached the Delhi High Court seeking release of Indian currency amounting to ₹35.28 lakhs seized from the office premises of Petitioner No.1, Rohit Gupta, during search and seizure proceedings under Section 67 of the CGST Act, 2017. The petitioners contended that the seizure of cash was without authority of law and prayed for immediate release of the resumed amount along with costs of litigation.
Questions before Court
-
Whether cash seized during search under Section 67 of the CGST Act, 2017, could be lawfully retained by the Department?
-
Whether the petitioners were entitled to immediate release of the seized amount?
Observations (Paras 3–4)
The Court noted that the issue was already settled by its earlier judgment in Deepak Khandelwal, Proprietor M/s Shri Shyam Metal v. Commissioner of CGST, Delhi West & Anr. (2023:DHC:5823-DB), where it was held that the CGST Act does not empower authorities to seize currency during search proceedings. The learned counsel for the respondents conceded to the applicability of this precedent and undertook that the seized cash would be released to the petitioner within ten days.
Judgment (Paras 5–7)
The Court recorded the statement of the respondents and disposed of the petition directing that the seized sum of ₹35.28 lakhs be released within ten days. It clarified that this order would not prevent the Department from taking steps in accordance with law for any statutory violations found against the petitioners.
Table of Cases Referred
| Case | Court | Citation | Ratio / Verdict |
|---|---|---|---|
| Deepak Khandelwal, Proprietor M/s Shri Shyam Metal v. Commissioner of CGST, Delhi West & Anr. | Delhi High Court | 2023:DHC:5823-DB | Held that CGST Act does not empower seizure of cash during search under Section 67; any such retention of currency is illegal. |
Between Fine Lines
This judgment reinforces the principle that while GST authorities may conduct search and seizure operations under Section 67, their powers are strictly confined to the provisions of the CGST Act. Cash does not fall within the ambit of “goods” under the statute, and therefore, its seizure is beyond jurisdiction. For businesses, this ensures that unaccounted or accounted cash found during searches cannot be confiscated arbitrarily, though separate proceedings under other laws remain open.
Disclaimer – “The above summary is for academic purpose only; not formal legal opinion. Seek professional opinion before application. Author or publisher or website shall not be responsible for any usage in any form.”
