Ms Shree Khatu Shyam Alloys vs. State Of Punjab And Other
Facts
The petitioner, M/s. Shree Khatu Shyam Alloys, filed a writ petition before the Punjab and Haryana High Court challenging the continued attachment of its bank accounts. The petitioner contended that the attachment had persisted for over a year, which they argued was in violation of Section 83(2) of the Goods and Services Tax, 2017. The petitioner relied on the Supreme Court judgment in Kesari Nandan Mobile Vs. Office of Assistant Commissioner of State Tax. The State counsel, after obtaining instructions, did not dispute the petitioner's factual assertions and assured the Court that the attachment would be revoked within a week.
Held
The Court held that the continued attachment of the petitioner's bank accounts for over one year was a matter of concern, implicitly acknowledging the petitioner's grievance regarding the violation of Section 83(2) of the GST Act, 2017. The Court was persuaded by the fair stand taken by the respondents. The primary direction issued by the Court was to the respondents to revoke the attachment of the petitioner's bank accounts within a period of one week from the date of the order. The Court disposed of the writ petition based on the assurance given by the State counsel. The ratio decidendi is that statutory provisions regarding the duration of attachment of bank accounts under GST must be adhered to, and authorities are bound by their assurances given before the High Court.
Key Issues
1. Whether the continued attachment of the petitioner's bank accounts for over one year is in violation of Section 83(2) of the Goods and Services Tax, 2017? The petitioner argued that the attachment of bank accounts beyond the period stipulated in Section 83(2) of the GST Act, 2017, is illegal and violates the statutory mandate. They relied on the Supreme Court's decision in Kesari Nandan Mobile Vs. Office of Assistant Commissioner of State Tax, which presumably supports their contention regarding the time limit for attachment. The revenue (State of Punjab and others) did not dispute the factual assertions made by the petitioner regarding the duration of the attachment and conceded that the attachment would be revoked.
Sections Cited
Section 83(2)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
114 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CWP-25634-2026 (O&M) Date of Decision: 14th August, 2026. M/S. SHREE KHATU SHYAM ALLOYS
.…...Petitioner(s) V/s STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS
.....Respondent(s)
CORAM: HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ROHIT KAPOOR
(Through Video Conference/Hybrid Mode)
Present Mr. Chetan Jain, Advocate, (appeared through VC)
Mr. Mukul Singla, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Mr. Saurabh Kapoor, Addl. A.G., Punjab.
****
ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA, A.C.J. (Oral)
The limited grievance raised by the petitioner in the present writ petition is that, notwithstanding the expiry of more than one year, the attachment of the petitioner’s bank accounts continues, which is in violation of Section 83 (2) of the Goods and Services Tax, 2017. 2. Reliance is placed upon the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Commissioner of State Tax ; (2025) 33 Centax 224 (SC).
Learned State counsel, who has appeared on advance notice, has obtained instructions in the matter does not dispute the factual assertions plead
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 Punjab and Haryana High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.