The Delhi High Court has upheld the GST search conducted after taking the keys from the tenant, however, the court barred the use of family CCTV footage to safeguard privacy.
The bench of Justice Prathiba M. Singh and Justice Shail Jain have issued the directions to address concerns relating to privacy.
- Manner in which the CCTV footage is to be copied
Insofar as the CCTV footage of the residence is concerned, the hard disk, or any memory cards, which contain the CCTV footage of the residential premises, would not be accessed by the officials of the GST Department, except, in the presence of at least one member of the Gumber family, and one authorised representative.
After viewing the footage in their presence, if there is any relevant data that is required by the GST Department, only to that extent, the same would be copied. All the remaining footage would be returned to the Petitioners.
- Search of M/s Genesis Enterprises
Insofar as the search of M/s Genesis Enterprises is concerned, usually, the officials of the GST Department ought to ensure that the person who is being investigated, gives access to the premises that are to be searched.
Taking access through a tenant who may be having keys of the premises, may not be permissible, unless it is with the knowledge of the person/entity being searched.
If the GST officials are of the opinion that the person being investigated is not providing access to the premises, then, after following the due process, in terms of Section 67(4) of the Act, after recording the requisite ‘reasons to believe’, the locks can be broken open, as per law.
- Communications with persons under investigation
The Court has also perused the Email, and Whatsapp chats sequence, which have been placed on record.
Email Communication: All communications by the officials of the GST department, with the person/s or entities being investigated ought to be in the official prescribed mode. Whenever emails are sent, the name, and designation of the official ought to be mentioned, so that it can be properly traced back to the person who has sent the email.
Whatsapp Communication: Insofar as the Whatsapp communication is concerned, the same would not be usually permissible, unless there is an exceptional circumstance, or an emergency. Engaging in such Whatsapp communication, may, in fact, make the officials of the GST Department subject to various allegations, which ought to be avoided.
- Allegations related to payments under coercion and duress
Insofar as the allegations related to payments having been made under coercion and duress are concerned, this Court is of the opinion that on the overall fact situation which has emerged, the allegations of coercion or duress would need deeper examination in appropriate proceedings, as there are different versions by the Petitioners, as also by the officials of the GST Department.
The person, Mr. Abhishek Gumber, who is stated to have made the said deposits, is fully aware of the consequences of such actions. He has also engaged in continuous communication on Whatsapp with the official of the GST Department, which ought to have been avoided.
Be that as it may, insofar as the payments that have been made, and the refund applications which are alleged to have been withdrawn are concerned, the same would be subject to outcome of the Show Cause Notice proceedings. If in the Show Cause Notice proceedings, the Petitioners succeed, the refund applications would then be permitted to be revived by the Petitioners.
Background
The petitioner, Gumber family, including Mr. Vikas Gumber, his wife Bharti, their sons Abhishek, Anurag, Ankit, and their families, has challenged searches by the CGST Department. The petitions allege that on July 22, 2025, officials unlawfully raided their Noida residence, seizing documents, electronic gadgets, and devices. Two days later, on July 24, 2025, summons were served on Mr. Vikas Gumber and firm partners at Marengo Asia Hospital, Faridabad. The family claims multiple violations by the GST Department during the search and seizure.
The petitioner contended that the panchnama about the search at the residential premises is not properly recorded, and certain facts are not mentioned in the same. For example, the seizure of the CCTV footage from the residential premises of the Petitioners has not been properly mentioned. The seizure of the CCTV footage from the residence, severely violates the right to privacy of the Petitioners, as the residence from which the CCTV footage was seized, has various family members of the Gumber family residing therein. Various payments were made on behalf of the Petitioners by one of the sons of the Gumber family, under coercion and duress. The refund applications, filed by the Petitioners, were made to be withdrawn under coercion and duress by the officials of the GST Department.
Conclusion
The court clarified that the GST Department is free to investigate any of the other Levels 1, 2, 3 and 4 firms as well, or any other individuals/entities and proceed in accordance with law. None of the observations made in this order would have any binding effect on any other proceedings, as also the adjudication proceedings, as the Court has not examined the factual aspects of the allegations made considering the scope of exercise of writ jurisdiction.
Case Details
Case Title: Genesis Enterprises Versus Principal Commissioner CGST Delhi East
Case No.: W.P.(C) 13821/2025 & CM APPL. 56711/2025
Date: 15th September 2025
Counsel For Petitioner: Bharat Bhushan
Counsel For Respondent: Arun Khatri, SSC
