The respondents are hereby directed to defreeze the petitioners’ bank account
Section 83 of the CGST Act— Provisional Attachment of Bank Accounts --The petitioners sought directions for respondent to permit operation of bank accounts of petitioners as attachment order dated 13.06.2019 cease to operate in terms of Section 83(2) of the Act and also to direct the respondent(s) to defreeze the bank accounts of the petitioners. The respondent vide order dated 13.06.2019 attached the bank accounts of the petitioner provisionally under Section 83. Vide letter dated 31.10.2020 petitioner sent a legal notice to respondent to defreeze its accounts provisionally attached beyond the statutory period of one year. The petitioner submitted that provisional attachment of a bank account of a party cannot continue beyond a period of one year prescribed under subsection (2) of Section 83 of the Act. The court observed that similar question has been answered in the case of M/s A.P. Steels and Sri Sanjay Kumar Mishra v. Additional Director General, DGCI, Bangalore Zonal Unit, Bengaluru, 2020(4) GSLT 169.
Held that:- The Hon’ble High Court allowed the writ petitions in terms of decision rendered in A.P. Steels’s case and directed the respondents Banks to allow the petitioners to operate their bank accounts forthwith.
The respondents are hereby directed to defreeze the petitioners’ bank account
Section 83 of the CGST Act— Provisional Attachment of Bank Accounts --The petitioners sought directions for respondent to permit operation of bank accounts of petitioners as attachment order dated 13.06.2019 cease to operate in terms of Section 83(2) of the Act and also to direct the respondent(s) to defreeze the bank accounts of the petitioners. The respondent vide order dated 13.06.2019 attached the bank accounts of the petitioner provisionally under Section 83. Vide letter dated 31.10.2020 petitioner sent a legal notice to respondent to defreeze its accounts provisionally attached beyond the statutory period of one year. The petitioner submitted that provisional attachment of a bank account of a party cannot continue beyond a period of one year prescribed under subsection (2) of Section 83 of the Act. The court observed that similar question has been answered in the case of M/s A.P. Steels and Sri Sanjay Kumar Mishra v. Additional Director General, DGCI, Bangalore Zonal Unit, Bengaluru, 2020(4) GSLT 169.
Held that:- The Hon’ble High Court allowed the writ petitions in terms of decision rendered in A.P. Steels’s case and directed the respondents Banks to allow the petitioners to operate their bank accounts forthwith.