Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Manmohan, Navin Chawla, JJ.
Karamjit Jaiswal - Appellant
Versus
Commissioner Of Central Taxes Gst Delhi East - Respondent
Civil Writ Petition No. 2408 of 2022
Decided On : 08-02-2022
Attachment - Challenge to Attachment Orders under CGST Act, 2017 - The court directed the Respondent to defreeze the bank account and release the immovable properties of the Petitioner as no fresh attachment order had been issued after the expiry of the provisional order under Section 83(1) of the CGST act.
Fact of the Case:
The Petitioner challenged the attachment of personal bank accounts and immovable properties under Section 83 of the CGST act, 2017, and sought a direction to defreeze the accounts.
Finding of the Court:
The Court found that the provisional attachment order had ceased to have effect after one year, and no fresh attachment order had been issued. The Respondent was directed to defreeze the bank account and release the immovable properties of the Petitioner.
Issues: Challenge to attachment orders under the CGST act, 2017 and the validity of the provisional attachment.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that every provisional order ceases to have effect after the expiry of one year from the date of the order made under Section 83(1) of the CGST act, and no fresh attachment order had been issued.
Final Decision: The court directed the Respondent to defreeze the bank account and release the immovable properties of the Petitioner not later than three days from the date of uploading the order.
JUDGMENT
Manmohan, J. - C.M.Nos.6909-6910/2022
Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
accordingly, the applications stand disposed of.
W.P.(C) No.2408/2022 & C.M.No.6908/2022
1. The petition has been heard by way of video conferencing.
2. Present writ petition has been filed challenging the letter dated 27th November, 2020, whereby the Respondent has directed attachment of the immovable properties and bank accounts of the Petitioner. Petitioner also seeks a direction to the Respondent to defreeze the accounts of the Petitioner.
3. Learned counsel for the Petitioner states that the personal bank accounts and immovable properties of the Petitioner had been attached under Section 83 of the CGST act, 2017 while conducting inquiry of M/s Milkfood Ltd. He states that though the Petitioner owns 34.79% shares of M/s Milkfood Ltd., yet he is neither the Director nor the authorised signatory and is not even involved in the day-to-day decision making process of the company.
4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner states that the Petitioner is not a taxable person as defined under Section 2(107), CGST act, 2017 and is not registered under the CGST act, 2017. He states that the provisional attachment of the bank accounts of the petitioner's daughter has already been quashed by this Court vide order dated 15th May, 2021 passed in in W.P.(C) No.2348/2021.
5. Learned counsel for the Petitioner states that the provisional attachment order, in any event, has ceased to have effect after the lapse of one year i.e. on 27th November, 2021.
6. Issue notice. Mr.Harpreet Singh, learned standing counsel accepts notice on behalf of the Respondent. He fairly states that the impugned attachment orders have neither been renewed nor any fresh orders of attachment have been passed. He, however, states that a show-cause notice has been issued to the Petitioner under Section 74 of the CGST act.
7. admittedly, every provisional order ceases to have effect after the expiry of a period of one year from the date of the order made under Section 83(1) of the CGST act. after the issuance of the impugned orders, no fresh attachment order has been issued. Consequently, this Court directs the Respondent to defreeze the bank account and release the immovable properties of the Petitioner not later than three days from the date of uploading the order.
8. With the aforesaid directions, present writ petition along with pending application stands disposed of.
Provisional attachment orders under the CGST act cease to have effect after one year, and no fresh attachment order can be issued thereafter.
Provisional attachment of bank accounts under the CGST Act ceases to be valid after one year unless renewed, emphasizing the necessity for adherence to legal procedures.
Section 83(2) of the CGST Act, which governs the ceasing of effect of provisional attachment orders after one year, was the central legal principle established in the judgment.
Provisional attachment under Section 83 of the CGST Act ceases after one year unless renewed, rendering ineffective any unrenewed attachment orders.
The principle that a writ cannot be entertained when an efficacious alternative remedy exists is upheld under Section 159(5) of the CGST Rules, 2017.
Provisional attachment of bank accounts under Section 83(2) of the CGST Act ceases after one year unless a fresh order is issued.
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....
Provisional attachment orders under Section 83 of the CGST Act cease after one year unless proceedings are pending; failure to comply undermines enforcement actions.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the provisional attachment under Section 83 of the CGST Act ceases to have effect after the expiry of one year from the date of the order, and....
Section 83(2) of the CGST Act provides for the cessation of provisional attachment after one year from the date the order was made under Section 83(1).
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
