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



IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Manmohan, Navin Chawla, JJ.
Karamjit Jaiswal - Appellant
Versus
Commissionerof Central Taxes GST Delhi East - Respondent
W.P.(C) 2408 of 2022
Decided On : 08-02-2022




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.

Headnote:(A) Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 - Section 83 - Writ petition challenging attachment of immovable properties and bank accounts - Petitioner owns shares but is not a director or authorized signatory - Legal argument that attachment has ceased after one year noted - Court finds no renewal of attachment orders - Directs defreezing of accounts and release of properties. (Paras 3, 5, 7)

(B) Provisional attachment of accounts ceases to have effect after one year unless renewed - Court emphasizes the need for a fresh order for continued attachment. (Para 7)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner challenged the attachment of properties and bank accounts under the CGST Act, arguing he is not a taxable person and has no involvement in the company's decisions.

Findings of Court:
The Court found that no fresh attachment order was issued after the initial provisional order, thus directing the defreezing and release of properties.

Issues: The central issue was whether the provisional attachment order remained valid after one year and the legal standing of the petitioner as a shareholder without direct involvement in the company.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that provisional orders, including attachments, expire after one year unless renewed, underscoring proper legal procedure and rights of the petitioner.

Result: Writ petition allowed; attachment orders quashed.

Table of Content
1. challenge of property attachment (Para 2)
2. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8)

JUDGMENT

Manmohan, J.: (Oral)

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 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.

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