The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Puneet Batra v. Union of India & Ors. [W.P.(C) 11021/2025 dated September 18, 2026] dismissed the writ petition filed by an Advocate challenging the search conducted under Section 67(2) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (“the CGST Act”) at the his premises, including his own cabin, and the consequential seizure of his CPU and documents, and held that once the premises stood validly authorised to be searched on recorded reasons to believe, the search cannot be declared unauthorised merely because one cabin therein was used by an Advocate, and that advocate-client privilege, which is a privilege of the client and not of the Advocate, cannot operate as an absolute bar against investigation into the Advocate’s own conduct where the Department has placed prima facie material indicating that he may have acted beyond the role of a legal adviser and been involved in the affairs under investigation.
CLICK HERE FOR OFFICIAL JUDGMENT COPY
(Author can be reached at info@a2ztaxcorp.com)
DISCLAIMER: The views expressed are strictly of the author and A2Z Taxcorp LLP. The contents of this article are solely for informational purpose and for the reader’s personal non-commercial use. It does not constitute professional advice or recommendation of firm. Neither the author nor firm and its affiliates accepts any liabilities for any loss or damage of any kind arising out of any information in this article nor for any actions taken in reliance thereon. Further, no portion of our article or newsletter should be used for any purpose(s) unless authorized in writing and we reserve a legal right for any infringement on usage of our article or newsletter without prior permission.
