SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(Del) 1081

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

Advocates appeared:
Harpreet Singh, Advocate

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.

Headnote:

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.

    Click Here to Read the rest of this document
    1
    2
    3
    4
    5
    6
    7
    8
    9
    10
    11
    SupremeToday Portrait Ad
    supreme today icon
    logo-black

    An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

    Please visit our Training & Support
    Center or Contact Us for assistance

    qr

    Scan Me!

    India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

    For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

    whatsapp-icon Back to top