Ask Jurishour AI

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
tdb_templates
saswp_reviews
saswp-collections
saswp_rvs_location
tdc-review-email
web-story-font
web-story
googlesitekit_email
tds_locker
tds_email
saswp
mailpoet_page
mailpoet_email
tdcpt_tunes
tdc-review
pronamic_payment
pronamic_gateway
pronamic_pay_subscr
wpcode
HomeGSTRs. 39 Lakh Cash Seized in GST Officer Theft Case Lies Unclaimed;...

Rs. 39 Lakh Cash Seized in GST Officer Theft Case Lies Unclaimed; CBI Steps In

Published on

🚀 Stay Connected With JurisHour

WhatsApp X Telegram

A staggering Rs. 39 lakh in cash, recovered during a theft investigation at Antop Hill police station, remains unclaimed as both the complainant and accused — officers from the Goods and Services Tax (GST) department — are refusing to acknowledge ownership of the money.

The case has now attracted the attention of the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), which is expected to initiate proceedings under anti-corruption laws.

The case began on June 10 when Umesh Yogendra Narayan, a superintendent with the GST department, lodged a theft complaint with Antop Hill police. Narayan, who resides in the Central Government Employees Society (CGS) complex, alleged that his house was broken into the previous day while he was at work. He claimed valuables worth Rs. 6.95 lakh — including cash, a laptop, and his wife’s jewellery — were stolen.

However, the investigation soon took an unexpected turn. Narayan, whose wife has been living in Patna since June 2024, had been residing alone in Mumbai for over 16 months. This raised questions about his claim regarding the stolen jewellery. Further scrutiny revealed that Narayan had handed over a spare key to his colleague, Deepak Dahiya, an executive assistant in the GST department.

Although Dahiya had travelled with Narayan to work on June 9, investigators suspected he may have returned later to commit the theft. Acting on this suspicion, police searched Dahiya’s home and recovered Rs. 39 lakh in cash hidden under a bed. When questioned, Dahiya alleged that the money belonged to Narayan. However, Narayan vehemently denied any connection to the cash.

Dahiya was arrested on June 13 and granted bail shortly afterward. The GST department has since suspended him from service. According to investigators, only Rs. 5 lakh of the recovered amount may belong to Dahiya, while the rest is suspected to be unaccounted cash — possibly black money — linked to Narayan.

“It appears that Narayan may have tried to cover up the origin of the cash by filing a theft complaint, claiming the stolen items were mostly jewellery,” a police official stated.

With neither party coming forward to claim the Rs. 39 lakh, and given the suspicious nature of the funds, the case is now under the scanner of the CBI’s anti-corruption wing. Officers from the agency have begun recording statements as part of a preliminary probe and are expected to formally register a case soon.

The unclaimed cash remains in police custody as the mystery deepens around its true ownership and source.

Read More: 180-Day Export Obligation Limit Doesn’t Applies To Textile Imports Under QCOs: DGFT

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

Cash Refund Loses Its Character as Tax or Interest; 10% Pre-Deposit Required for GST Appeal: GSTAT Registry

The GST Appellate Tribunal’s Hyderabad Registry has opined that an amount received by a...

Can Disputed ITC Claim Amount to “Fraud or Suppression”? Allahabad HC Stays S. 74 Proceedings Against Samsung Display 

The Allahabad High Court has prima facie questioned the Revenue’s attempt to invoke the...

Bombay High Court Questions 6 Month Limit Under GST Notification for S. 16(5) ITC Benefit

The Nagpur Bench of the Bombay High Court has raised an important question concerning...

More like this

Cash Refund Loses Its Character as Tax or Interest; 10% Pre-Deposit Required for GST Appeal: GSTAT Registry

The GST Appellate Tribunal’s Hyderabad Registry has opined that an amount received by a...

Can Disputed ITC Claim Amount to “Fraud or Suppression”? Allahabad HC Stays S. 74 Proceedings Against Samsung Display 

The Allahabad High Court has prima facie questioned the Revenue’s attempt to invoke the...

Bombay High Court Questions 6 Month Limit Under GST Notification for S. 16(5) ITC Benefit

The Nagpur Bench of the Bombay High Court has raised an important question concerning...