IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Rajiv Shakdher, Poonam A. Bamba, JJ.
M/s Global Enterprises - Appellant
Versus
Commissioner Central Goods And Service Tax, Delhi East & Anr. - Respondents
Civil Writ Petition No. 8301 of 2021
Decided On : 29-03-2022
Provisional Attachment - Central Goods and Service Tax - The court held that the impugned order dated 26.03.2021, issued under Section 83 of the CGST act, had lost its efficacy and ordered the attachment to be lifted.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner's account was frozen for the second time after the earlier provisional attachment order was quashed by the court. The petitioner's grievance was that a fresh order was passed immediately after the earlier order was quashed.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the impugned order had lost its efficacy and ordered the attachment to be lifted.
Issues: The main issue was the validity of the fresh provisional attachment order passed after the earlier order was quashed.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on Section 83 of the CGST act, which provides that every provisional attachment shall cease to have effect after the expiry of a period of one year from the date of the order.
Final Decision: The court disposed of the writ petition by ordering the attachment to be lifted.
JUDGMENT
Rajiv Shakdher, J. - There is no representation on behalf of the petitioner.
2. This writ petition is directed against order dated 26.03.2021, passed by the Commissioner, Central Goods and Service Tax and Central Excise (CGST and CX), Delhi East.
2.1. Via the impugned order, the petitioner's current account maintained with axis Bank Limited, F-2/25 at Krishna Nagar, Delhi-110051, stands frozen.
3. To be noted, this is the second round of litigation for the petitioner.
3.1. The petitioner's account was frozen for the first time via provisional attachment order dated 19.05.2020, which was, concededly, quashed by this ourt via order dated 22.03.2021, passed in W.P.(C) 5344/2020.
4. The petitioner's grievance, as noted above, is that immediately, after this Court had quashed the earlier provisional attachment order on 22.03.2021, a fresh order was passed on 26.03.2021.
5. as per the assertions made in the rejoinder filed by the petitioner, the proceedings under Section 74 of the Central Goods and Services Tax act, 2017 [in short "CGST act"] are no longer pending, as an adjudication order has been passed on 08.09.2021.
5.1. It is averred that the petitioner has preferred an appeal, against the order dated 08.09.2021, and deposited 10 per cent of the tax demanded by the respondent.
6. Given the aforesaid position, the impugned order dated 26.03.2021, which has been issued, concededly, under Section 83 of the CGST act, cannot remain efficacious, beyond the period of one year commencing from the date of the order. The relevant provision reads as follows-
'83. Provisional attachment to protect revenue in certain cases.-
(1) Where during the pendency of any proceedings under section 62 or section 63 or section 64 or section 67 or section 73 or section 74, the Commissioner is of the opinion that for the purpose of protecting the interest of the Government revenue, it is necessary so to do, he may, by order in writing attach provisionally any property, including bank account, belonging to the taxable person in such manner as may be prescribed.
(2) Every such provisional attachment shall cease to have effect after the expiry of a period of one year from the date of the order made under sub-section (1).' [Emphasis is ours.]
7. Having regard to the foregoing, according to us, the impugned order dated 26.03.2021 has lost its efficacy, and, therefore, the attachment should stand lifted.
7.1. It is ordered accordingly.
8. The writ petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms.
9. The Registry will dispatch a copy of this order to the petitioner, via all permissible modes, including e-mail.
10. Mr Harpreet Singh, who appears on behalf of the respondents, will also ensure that a copy of this order is served on the aforementioned bank i.e., axis Bank Limited, F-2/25 at Krishna Nagar, Delhi-110051.
11. Parties will act, based on the digitally signed copy of this order.
The legal principle established is that a provisional attachment under Section 83 of the CGST act ceases to have effect after one year from the date of the order.
Provisional attachments under the CGST Act cease to be effective after one year from the date of the order if related proceedings are concluded.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the impact of the operative status of provisional attachment orders on the validity of a petition challenging such orders.
The operativeness of the last provisional order and its impact on rendering the petition academic.
The court emphasizes that provisional attachment orders cease to be operative after a certain period of time.
The power under Section 83 of the CGST Act can only be exercised subject to specified conditions and by the Commissioner, and not by any other officer.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the provisional attachment order of a bank account ceases to have effect after one year from the date of issuance under Section 83 of the CGST....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.