Section 83 of the CGST Act read with Rule 159(1) of the CGST Rules empowers a Commissioner to protect the interests of the revenue by way of provisional attachment, but such provisional attachment cannot be ordered without fulfillment of the condition which are prescribed by the statute
Section 83 of the CGST Act, 2017 –Provisional Attachment of bank Account –-- The petitioner challenged the action of the department under section 83 of the Act and submitted that no proceedings are pending against him under Sections 62 or 63 or 64 or 67 or 73 or 74 of the Act. He placed his reliance on the decision of the Supreme Court in M/s. Radha Krishan Industries v/s. State of Himachal Pradesh & others. The court observed that provisional attachment cannot be ordered without fulfillment of the condition(s) precedent, and in the absence of fulfillment of such conditions(s) precedent, the respondent could not have protected the interest of the revenue in the manner, the impugned order was passed.
Held that:- The Hon’ble High Court allowed the writ petition and set aside the order and directed the respondent to defreeze the bank account of the petitioner.
Section 83 of the CGST Act read with Rule 159(1) of the CGST Rules empowers a Commissioner to protect the interests of the revenue by way of provisional attachment, but such provisional attachment cannot be ordered without fulfillment of the condition which are prescribed by the statute
Section 83 of the CGST Act, 2017 –Provisional Attachment of bank Account –-- The petitioner challenged the action of the department under section 83 of the Act and submitted that no proceedings are pending against him under Sections 62 or 63 or 64 or 67 or 73 or 74 of the Act. He placed his reliance on the decision of the Supreme Court in M/s. Radha Krishan Industries v/s. State of Himachal Pradesh & others. The court observed that provisional attachment cannot be ordered without fulfillment of the condition(s) precedent, and in the absence of fulfillment of such conditions(s) precedent, the respondent could not have protected the interest of the revenue in the manner, the impugned order was passed.
Held that:- The Hon’ble High Court allowed the writ petition and set aside the order and directed the respondent to defreeze the bank account of the petitioner.