M/S Vk Enterprises Through Its Proprietor Sh. Vijay Chopra vs. Directorate General Of Goods And Services Tax Intelligence, Dggi And Ors.

W.P.(C)/17012/2025HC DelhiGSTCNR DLHC01088048202527 November 2025Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES2 pages

For Petitioner: Mr. Vineet Bhatia, Mr. Chanderkant Singh, Ms. Aamnaya Jagannath Mishra, Mr. Abhinav Sharde, Mr. Keshav Garg, Mr. Parvesh Bansal, Mr. Rahul Bansal, Ms. Anu Aggarwal & Mr. Tanish Aggarwal, AdvsFor Respondent: Mr. Anurag Ojha, SSC with Mr. Dipak Raj, Mr. Priyatam Bhardwaj, Mr. Avinash Shukla & Mr. Ram Avtar Meena, Advs

AI SummaryRemanded

Facts

The Petitioner, M/s VK Enterprises, through its proprietor Sh. Vijay Chopra, filed a writ petition challenging a Provisional Attachment Order dated April 27, 2024, passed by the Directorate General of GST Intelligence (DGGI), Gurugram Zonal Unit. This order had attached the Petitioner's bank account bearing number 2021201007409 with Canara Bank, Paharganj Branch. The Petitioner contended that the one-year period stipulated under Section 83 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, for such an attachment had expired. The Court issued notice on November 11, 2025, and the Respondent's counsel sought instructions. On November 27, 2025, the Respondent informed the Court that the DGGI had withdrawn the provisional attachment order and restored the bank account via a communication dated November 12, 2025.

Held

The Court noted that the Petitioner had challenged the Provisional Attachment Order dated April 27, 2024, passed by the DGGI, primarily on the ground that the one-year period under Section 83 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, had lapsed. The Respondent, DGGI, through its counsel, informed the Court that the impugned provisional attachment order had been withdrawn and the Petitioner's bank account had been restored vide a communication dated November 12, 2025. A copy of this communication was placed on record. Given that the attachment order had been withdrawn by the authority that passed it, the Court found no further orders to be necessary. The Canara Bank was directed to permit the Petitioner to operate the attached bank account without any further orders from the DGGI. The petition was accordingly disposed of.

Key Issues

1. Whether the Provisional Attachment Order dated April 27, 2024, passed by the DGGI, is liable to be set aside on the ground that the period of one year under Section 83 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, has lapsed? Petitioner's Contention: The Petitioner argued that the one-year period for the provisional attachment order under Section 83 of the CGST Act, 2017, had expired, rendering the attachment invalid. The Petitioner relied on the statutory period prescribed for such attachments. Respondent's Contention: The Respondent, through its counsel, submitted that the DGGI had already withdrawn the impugned provisional attachment order and restored the Petitioner's bank account vide a communication dated November 12, 2025. The Respondent placed a copy of this communication on record.

Sections Cited

Section 83

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

$~155 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 17012/2025 M/S VK ENTERPRISES THROUGH ITS PROPRIETOR SH. VIJAY CHOPRA .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Vineet Bhatia, Mr. Chanderkant Singh, Ms. Aamnaya Jagannath Mishra, Mr. Abhinav Sharde, Mr. Keshav Garg, Mr. Parvesh Bansal, Mr. Rahul Bansal, Ms. Anu Aggarwal & Mr. Tanish Aggarwal, Advs. versus DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF GOODS AND SERVICES TAX INTELLIGENCE, DGGI AND ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Anurag Ojha, SSC with Mr. Dipak Raj, Mr. Priyatam Bhardwaj, Mr. Avinash Shukla & Mr. Ram Avtar Meena, Advs. CORAM: JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH JUSTICE MINI PUSHKARNA

O R D E R % 27.11.2025

This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.

The present petition has been filed challenging the impugned Provisional Attachment order dated 27th April, 2024 passed by the Directorate General of GST Intelligence, Gurugram Zonal Unit (hereinafter “DGGI”).

Vide the impugned order the bank account of the Petitioner bearing no. 2021201007409 with the Canara Bank (Paharganj Branch) has been attached.

It is submitted on behalf of the Petitioner that the period of one year This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 01/12/2025 at 15:34:36

under Section 83 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 has already lapsed.

Notice was issued on 11th November, 2025 and Mr. Ojha, ld. SSC was requested to seek instructions.

Today, ld. SSC has appeared and upon instructions, submits that the DGGI vide its communication dated 12th November, 2025 has restored the subject bank account and withdrawn the impugned provisional attachment order. Copy of the letter has been placed on record. Let the same be taken on record.

The Canara Bank (Paharganj Branch), New Delhi, shall accordingly permit the Petitioner to operate the bank account bearing no.2021201007409 without any further orders from the DGGI.

Since the attachment order has already been withdrawn, no further orders are called for. The petition is disposed of in these terms. All pending applications, if any, are also disposed of. PRATHIBA M. SINGH, J. MINI PUSHKARNA, J. NOVEMBER 27, 2025/pd/rm This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 01/12/2025 at 15:34:36

Reproduced from the public record of the Delhi High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.