HomeGSTSection 130 Of GST Act Can’t Be Applied For Mismatch In Stock...

Section 130 Of GST Act Can’t Be Applied For Mismatch In Stock Identified During Any Search Proceedings: Supreme Court

Published on

🚀 Stay Connected With JurisHour

WhatsApp X Telegram

The Supreme Court consisting of Justice Sanjay Kumar and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma has dismissed the Special Leave Petition (SLP) filed department against Allahabad High Court judgment which held that Section 130 of the CGST Act cannot be applied for mismatch in stock identified during any search proceedings.

The Allahabad High Court has held that at the time of survey, if some discrepancy in stock is found against the registered dealer, then the proceedings under sections 73/74 of the GST Act ought to have been initiated, instead of section 130 of the GST Act.

The petitioner is engaged in the business of purchase and sale of hosiery goods. He further submits that on 29.05.2018, an inspection/search was carried out at the business premises of the petitioner by the Special Investigation Branch without any physical measurement and by eye measurement and on the basis of the aforesaid inspection, proceedings under section 130 of the GST Act were initiated, to which the petitioner submitted its reply. Thereafter, the department  by the impugned order dated 10.09.2018, imposed tax & penalty. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner preferred an appeal, which has been dismissed.

The survey, which was made under Section 67 of the UPGST Act, proceeded with the notice under Section 30 of the Act read with Rule 32. He next submits that even assuming without admitting that if the goods were found in excess, then the proceedings should have been initiated as per Sections 73 & 74 of the Act. He further submits that as per Section 35 (3) of the Act, proceedings under Section 130 of the UPGST Act are not permissible against a registered dealer. 

The High Court held that the order passed under section 130 of the GST Act cannot be sustained in the eyes of law.

The department filed the special leave petition before the Supreme Court, which was dismissed.

Case Details

Case Title: Additional Commissioner Grade-2 & Anr. Versus M/S. Dayal Product

Case No.: Special Leave Petition (Civil) Diary No. 44119/2025

Date:  01-09-2025

Read More: Dry Dates Import: Prominent UAE-Based Trader Deepak Sewani Granted Bail

Mariya Paliwala
Mariya Paliwalahttps://www.jurishour.in/
Mariya is the Senior Editor at Juris Hour. She has 7+ years of experience on covering tax litigation stories from the Supreme Court, High Courts and various tribunals including CESTAT, ITAT, NCLAT, NCLT, etc. Mariya graduated from MLSU Law College, Udaipur (Raj.) with B.A.LL.B. and also holds an LL.M. She started her career as a freelance tax reporter in the leading online legal news companies.

Latest articles

JURISHOUR | TAX LAW DAILY BULLETIN : MARCH 13, 2026

Here’s the Tax Law Daily Bulletin for March 13, 2026.GSTELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSIONS ARE NOT...

Delay and Laches in Article 32 Petitions: Supreme Court Examines Decades-Old Compensation Claim by Mizo Chiefs

The Supreme Court examined whether a writ petition filed after several decades seeking compensation...

Auction Sale Can Be Scrutinised for Property Valuation Even After Confirmation: Supreme Court Upholds DRT Revaluation

The Supreme Court has held that even after confirmation of an auction sale in...

More like this

JURISHOUR | TAX LAW DAILY BULLETIN : MARCH 13, 2026

Here’s the Tax Law Daily Bulletin for March 13, 2026.GSTELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSIONS ARE NOT...

Delay and Laches in Article 32 Petitions: Supreme Court Examines Decades-Old Compensation Claim by Mizo Chiefs

The Supreme Court examined whether a writ petition filed after several decades seeking compensation...

Auction Sale Can Be Scrutinised for Property Valuation Even After Confirmation: Supreme Court Upholds DRT Revaluation

The Supreme Court has held that even after confirmation of an auction sale in...