The Central Goods and Services Tax Act does not permit the renewal of provisional attachment orders beyond one year, maintaining strict adherence to legislative intent that prohibits such re-issuance.

JUDGMENT

DIPANKAR DATTA J.

1. This civil appeal, by special leave, takes exception to the judgment and order dated 29th January, 2025¹[impugned order] passed by a Division Bench of the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad²[Gujarat High Court] dismissing a writ petition³[R/Special Civil Application No.16339 of 2024] presented before it by the appellant.

2. The writ petition was directed against provisional attachment orders dated 13th November, 2024 and 18th December, 2024 issued by the respondent in purported exercise of power conferred by Section 83 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017⁴[CGST Act]. The case run by the appellant in its writ petition was that prior to issuance of the impugned provisional attachment orders (dated 13th November, 2024 and 18th December, 2024), the respondent had issued provisional attachment orders dated 17th October, 2023 and 26th October, 2023; that the appellant had objected to such provisional attachment orders by submitting a representation dated 1st May, 2024 as permitted by Rule 159(5) of the CENTRAL GOODS AND SERVICES TAX RULES , 2017⁵[CGST Rules]; that the respondent, despite receipt of such representation, did not decide the same and kept the same pending; that, in terms of sub-section (2) of Section 83 of the CGST Act, the provisional attachment orders dated 17th October, 2023 and 26th October, 2023 lapsed upon expiry of a year, i.e., with effect from 18th October, 2024, and 27th October, 2024, respectively; and that, despite having no jurisdiction conferred by law, the respondent proceeded to pass fresh provisional attachment orders dated 13th November, 2024 and 18th December, 2024 terming it as a ‘RENEWAL’ of the earlier orders. Accordingly, it was prayed that the provisional attachment orders dated 13th November, 2024 and 18th December, 2024 be quashed and set aside and the attachment lifted to enable the appellant operate its bank accounts.

3. The Gujarat High Court, while spurning the appellant’s challenge, held in the impugned order that the law does not place any embargo for a second provisional attachment order to be issued after lapse of the earlier order and that the respondent, intending to safeguard the interest of the revenue, did not commit any breach of Section 83 of the CGST Act.

4. Legality and correctness of such reasons are under assail in this appeal.

5. Mr. Dave, learned counsel for the appellant, contends that the impugned order is indefensible. The reason assigned by the High Court is fundamentally flawed inasmuch as it travelled beyond the legislative intent and purpose of securing the interest of the revenue, overlooking that the life of a provisional attachment order is only for a year from the date it is issued.

6. Drawing a parallel with the provisions of the Central Excise Act, 1944⁶[Excise Act] and the CUSTOMS ACT , 1962⁷[ CUSTOMS ACT ], Mr. Dave further contends that both these taxing statutes provide for provisional attachment. In case of the Excise Act, Section 11DDA provides for provisional attachment. Sub-section (2) of Section 11DDA provides that the attachment shall cease to have effect after 6 months from the date of the order. This section further provides that the attachment may be extended, such that the total period does not exceed two years. Similar to the Excise Act, Section 28BA of the CUSTOMS ACT also