Watermelon Management Services Private Limited vs. The Commissioner, Central Tax, GST Delhi(East) & Anr.

W.P.(C)/3618/2020HC DelhiGSTCNR DLHC01018225202029 June 2020Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA7 pages

For Petitioner: Mr. Sunil Upadhyay, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr. Harpreet Singh, Sr. Standing Counsel for respondent no. 1 and 2. % Date of Decision: 29th June, 2020

AI SummaryPartly Allowed

Held

The Court directed the DGGI to conclude its investigation within three months. The petitioner was ordered to cooperate with the investigation, and depending on the outcome, either proceedings would be closed or a show cause notice would be issued.

Facts

The petitioner challenged an order that kept provisional attachment orders for their bank accounts alive. The attachment was based on allegations of fraudulent availment of Input Tax Credit (ITC) through fake invoices, with investigations being conducted by both the Commissioner of CGST and the DGGI.

Key Issues

The primary issue was the legality and continuation of provisional attachment orders during ongoing investigations. The court also considered the parallel investigations by different authorities.

Sections Cited

Section 67, Section 70, Section 74, Section 83

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

W.P. (C) 3618/2020 Page 1 of 7 #3 $~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 3618/2020 WATERMELON MANAGEMENT SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Sunil Upadhyay, Advocate versus THE COMMISSIONER, CENTRAL TAX, GST DELHI (EAST) & ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Harpreet Singh, Sr. Standing Counsel for respondent no. 1 and 2. % Date of Decision: 29th June, 2020 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA

J U D G M E N T

MANMOHAN, J: (Oral)

The petition has been heard by way of video conferencing.

Present writ petition has been filed challenging the impugned order dated 03rd June, 2020 passed by respondent No.1 whereby it has kept the provisional attachment orders dated 05th March, 2020 as well as corrigendum dated 01st June, 2020 alive after specifying that the reason for attachment was that proceeding under Section 67 of Central Goods and Service Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as “CGST Act”) was pending against the petitioner. However, the respondent No.1 accepted the fact that it W.P. (C) 36

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.

Create a free account Sign in

See plans and prices

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.