In the instant case, question is whether an order is required to be passed if an objection is field in terms of Rule 159(5) of CGST Rules. This court directed to submit fresh objections in terms of Rule 159(5) of the CGST Rules.
Section 83 of the CGST Act, 2017 – Provisional Attachment of Bank Account – The respondent challenged the order of provisional attachment under Section 83 of the Act, 2017. The respondent submitted that the allegation made against them that they have fraudulently availed ITC on fictitious invoices to discharge the GST liability is wholly unsustainable and an order of arrest was also passed. The Revenue sought to sustain the order of provisional attachment by contending that the case is with regard to bogus invoices to the tune of Rs. 121 Crores. Further, if the respondent/writ petitioner was aggrieved, they could very well have filed the objections to the order of provisional attachment in terms of Rule 159. The Court observed that a sum of Rs. 5.68 Crores, which was lying in the Bank Account of the respondent, was appropriated by the department and that the respondent had also agreed to pay another sum of Rs. 1 Crore against the estimated due tax. The payment of Rs. 5.68 Crores would amount to discharge of 27.05% of the estimated tax dues, therefore, there is no meaning in attaching the Bank Account. The court observed that the observations made in the order impugned before us is premature. The respondent has given a representation/objection, dated 18.03.2021, seeking to lift the order of attachment and this application is undoubtedly an application to be reckoned under Rule 159(5) but the department has not disposed of the said application by passing a reasoned order.
Held that:- The Hon’ble High Court set aside the order and directions issued in the Petition. Further, directed the respondent to submit fresh objections in terms of Rule 159(5), within three days. On such objections being filed, the appellant/appropriate authority shall consider the objections and pass a speaking order and communicate the same to the respondent within a period of seven days therefrom.
In the instant case, question is whether an order is required to be passed if an objection is field in terms of Rule 159(5) of CGST Rules. This court directed to submit fresh objections in terms of Rule 159(5) of the CGST Rules.
Section 83 of the CGST Act, 2017 – Provisional Attachment of Bank Account – The respondent challenged the order of provisional attachment under Section 83 of the Act, 2017. The respondent submitted that the allegation made against them that they have fraudulently availed ITC on fictitious invoices to discharge the GST liability is wholly unsustainable and an order of arrest was also passed. The Revenue sought to sustain the order of provisional attachment by contending that the case is with regard to bogus invoices to the tune of Rs. 121 Crores. Further, if the respondent/writ petitioner was aggrieved, they could very well have filed the objections to the order of provisional attachment in terms of Rule 159. The Court observed that a sum of Rs. 5.68 Crores, which was lying in the Bank Account of the respondent, was appropriated by the department and that the respondent had also agreed to pay another sum of Rs. 1 Crore against the estimated due tax. The payment of Rs. 5.68 Crores would amount to discharge of 27.05% of the estimated tax dues, therefore, there is no meaning in attaching the Bank Account. The court observed that the observations made in the order impugned before us is premature. The respondent has given a representation/objection, dated 18.03.2021, seeking to lift the order of attachment and this application is undoubtedly an application to be reckoned under Rule 159(5) but the department has not disposed of the said application by passing a reasoned order.
Held that:- The Hon’ble High Court set aside the order and directions issued in the Petition. Further, directed the respondent to submit fresh objections in terms of Rule 159(5), within three days. On such objections being filed, the appellant/appropriate authority shall consider the objections and pass a speaking order and communicate the same to the respondent within a period of seven days therefrom.