Vk Ready Mix Concrete Private Limited vs. Commissioner CGST And Ex And Ors
Facts
The petitioner, VK Ready Mix Concrete Private Limited, filed a writ petition challenging an order dated January 3, 2023, by which their bank account with HDFC Bank was provisionally attached under Section 83 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The attachment was made to protect government revenue. The respondents, Commissioner CGST and others, were represented. The key fact is that the impugned order of provisional attachment was passed on January 3, 2022. The petition was filed in 2022. The respondents' counsel confirmed that no fresh order had been passed to extend the attachment.
Held
The Court held that the provisional attachment order dated January 3, 2022, under Section 83 of the CGST Act, had ceased to have effect. This decision was based on the clear mandate of Section 83(2) of the CGST Act, which states that every such provisional attachment shall cease to have effect after the expiry of a period of one year from the date of the order. The Court noted that one year had admittedly elapsed since the impugned order was passed. The respondents' counsel confirmed that no fresh order had been passed to extend the attachment. Consequently, the Court directed HDFC Bank (respondent no.3) not to prevent the petitioner from operating its bank account if the stoppage was solely due to the expired provisional attachment order. The petition was disposed of as no further orders were required.
Key Issues
1. Whether the provisional attachment order dated January 3, 2022, under Section 83 of the CGST Act, remains operative after the expiry of one year from its date of passing? The petitioner contended that Section 83(2) of the CGST Act clearly stipulates that a provisional attachment ceases to have effect after one year from the date of the order. Therefore, the impugned order, having been passed on January 3, 2022, would have expired by operation of law on January 3, 2023. The petitioner relied on the statutory provision itself. The respondents, represented by their counsel, sought time to ascertain if any fresh order had been passed to extend the attachment. Subsequently, on instructions, they confirmed that no such fresh order had been issued. The respondents did not present any argument against the petitioner's contention regarding the expiry of the attachment order.
Sections Cited
Section 83, Section 83(1), Section 83(2)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
O R D E R % 06.02.2023
The petitioner has filed the present petition impugning an order dated 03.01.2023, whereby the petitioner’s bank account (account no. 50200016978151) maintained with the branch of HDFC Bank located at Rohini, Delhi was provisionally attached under Section 83 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (hereafter ‘the CGST Act’).
Section 83 of the CGST Act reads as under:- “83. Provisional attachment to protect revenue in certain cases. [(1) Where, after the initiation of any proceeding under Chapter XII, Chapter XIV or Chapter XV, the Commissioner is of the opinion that for the purpose of protecting the interest of the Government revenue it is necessary so to do, he may, by order in writing, attach provisionally, any property, including bank account, belonging to the taxable person or any person specifie
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
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.