Rahul Aggarwal vs. The Commissioner Of Central Tax
Facts
The petitioners, Rahul Aggarwal and Kumari Vaanya Aggarwal, challenged a letter dated 09.02.2021 issued by the Commissioner of Central Tax to HDFC Bank, provisionally attaching the petitioners' bank account (Account No. 05861050024509) under Section 83 of the CGST Act, 2017. The attachment was for a period of one year. The petitioners also challenged a subsequent letter dated 11.02.2021 from the bank informing them about the 'No Debit/Hold' status of their accounts. The petitioners sought to declare these actions illegal and sought the unfreezing of their bank accounts. The revenue contended that the attachment was justified due to a fraudulent refund claim made by the first petitioner and that the attachment was reviewed and approved for a further period on 11.03.2022.
Held
The Court held that the provisional attachment of the bank account, ordered on 09.02.2021, automatically ceased to have effect after the expiry of one year from the date of the order, as mandated by Sub-Section (2) of Section 83 of the CGST Act. The Court noted that while the revenue claimed a review and approval for a further period on 11.03.2022, no such order was placed on record. Even if such a review occurred, Sub-Section (2) of Section 83 is explicit: every provisional attachment shall cease to have effect after the expiry of one year from the date of the order. Therefore, the continuance of the impugned order of provisional attachment could not be sustained. The Court set aside and quashed the order of provisional attachment and directed the respondents to forthwith de-attach the petitioners' bank account.
Key Issues
1. Whether the provisional attachment of the petitioners' bank account under Section 83 of the CGST Act, 2017, which was initially for a period of one year from 09.02.2021, ceased to have effect after the expiry of that period, irrespective of any subsequent review or approval for extension. Arguments: Petitioner: The provisional attachment order, having expired after one year from its issuance on 09.02.2021, is no longer valid. The subsequent actions of the revenue to extend the attachment are illegal and arbitrary. Revenue: The provisional attachment order was justified due to a fraudulent refund claim. The order was reviewed by the Commissioner on 11.03.2022, and a further period of attachment was approved, making the attachment continue to be in effect.
Sections Cited
Section 83, Section 62, Section 63, Section 64, Section 67, Section 73, Section 74
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Juri iction) THUR AY ,THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN AND THE HONOURABLE MRS JUSTICE SUREPALLI NANDA Between: AND
J. The Commissioner of Central Tax, Ranga Reddy GST Commissinerate Posnett Bhavan Tilak Road, Ramkote, Hyderabad - 500001 The Assistant Commissioner, in-situ of Central Tax Anti Evasion Section Rangareddy CGST Commissionerate Hyderabad The Branch Manager, HDFC Bank Limited 1845/138 Ground Floor Shanti Nagar, Trinagar New Delhi - '1 10 035 ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction particularly one in nature of Writ of Mandamus under article 226 of the Constitution of lndia, declaring the letter No.HQAE No.3/2021-RR dated 09-02-202'1 sent by the Respondent No.1 to the Respondent No.3, informing that the in exercise of the powers conferred under section 83 of the CGST Act 2017, provisionally attach for a period of one year from the date of the order, the b
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 Telangana High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.