Tirupati Trading Company vs. Commissioner Of CGST, Delhi (East) & Ors.

Facts

The petitioner, Tirupati Trading Company, filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus to unfreeze three bank accounts provisionally attached by the Commissioner of CGST, Delhi (East) in 2020-21. The petitioner stated that no communication regarding the attachment was sent to them. The petition did not annex the attachment order or any communication from the petitioner inquiring about it. The revenue, represented by the Commissioner of CGST, submitted that an attachment order under Section 83 of the CGST Act, 2017, is not operative beyond one year from its date.

Held

The Court held that a provisional attachment order passed under Section 83(1) of the CGST Act, 2017, ceases to be operative after one year from the date of the order, as stipulated by Section 83(2) of the CGST Act, 2017. The Court accepted the fair contention of the revenue that the attachment order, issued in 2020-21, would not be operative beyond one year. Consequently, the Court directed that the petitioner shall not be interdicted from operating its bank accounts pursuant to any provisional attachment order passed in the year 2020-21 under Section 83 of the CGST Act, 2017. This decision was based solely on the statutory position regarding the expiry of the attachment period. The Court explicitly clarified that the order was passed solely on this premise.

Key Issues

1. Whether a provisional attachment order passed under Section 83 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (CGST Act), remains operative beyond a period of one year from its date, thereby justifying the continued freezing of bank accounts? Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner sought the defreezing of its bank accounts, implying that the attachment should no longer be valid. While not explicitly argued, the prayer for mandamus suggests the petitioner believed the attachment was either invalid or had expired. Revenue's Contention: The Commissioner of CGST, Delhi (East) argued that any attachment order passed under Section 83(1) of the CGST Act, 2017, ceases to be operative after one year from the date of the order, as per Section 83(2) of the CGST Act, 2017. They suggested the petition be disposed of with observations to this effect.