Back
RITU BAHRI, KULDEEP TIWARI
Dholagiri Enterprises – Appellant
Versus
Commissioner, CGST, PKL – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Ritu Bahri, J.
The petitioner-assesee has approached this Court by filing the present writ petition for issuance of writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing order dated 20.01.2023 (P-1) and show cause notice dated 11.04.2023 (P-3)
2. The facts as stated in the petition are that search operations were carried out against the petitioner on 08.01.2021 by various teams of CGST under section 67 of CGST Act. An inquiry was initiated against the petitioner by Superintendent Anti Evasion, CGST, Panchkula under section 70 of CGST Act. The Bank Account of the petitioner was provisionally attached under section 83 of the Act by respondent no 1, vide order dated 10.03.2021/12.03.2021 and the petitioner filed its objections on 19.03.2021 against provisional attachment, under rule 159(5) of CGST Rules, 2017 which were not decided by respondent no 1.
3. Petitioner approached this Court by filing CWP No. 21916-2021and vide order dated 23.11.2021, this Court called the explanation of respondent No. 1 for not deciding the objections for more than 08 months. Respondent No. 1 was also directed to decide objections by passing a speaking order before next date of hearing. Thereafter, respond
The court confirmed that provisional attachment of assets under the CGST Act is valid only when initiated proceedings comply with specified statutory chapters.
The necessity of the formation of opinion by the Commissioner, the live nexus to the purpose of protecting the interest of the government revenue, and the existence of tangible material before the Co....
The court held that Section 83 of the CGST Act does not require a pre-decisional hearing before provisional attachment and strict legal standards must be met for such actions.
, time can be extended for a further period of six month. Appropriate order for extension of period of provisional attachment would only be passed upon satisfaction of the criteria listed out. An inj....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the provisional attachment of a bank account under the MGST Act must be justified by pending proceedings under the relevant sections, and must....
The Commissioner must form an opinion based on relevant facts and tangible material with a live link to the formation of the opinion when exercising the power of provisional attachment under Section ....
Provisional attachments under Section 83 of the CGST/SGST Acts cannot extend beyond one year, and fresh orders cannot be issued after this period.
Provisional attachments under Section 83 of the CGST/SGST Acts cannot extend beyond one year, as specified in Section 83(2), and any fresh orders issued after this period are invalid.
Provisional attachment orders under Section 83 of the CGST Act cannot extend beyond one year as per the explicit language of the statute, requiring strict interpretation.
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
