Egc Network PVT LTD And Another vs. Union Of INDIA And Others
Facts
The petitioner, M/s EGC Network Pvt. Ltd., filed a writ petition before the Punjab and Haryana High Court seeking the release of its provisionally frozen bank accounts. The accounts were attached under Section 83 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The petitioner contended that the period of provisional attachment, which is statutorily limited to one year, had expired. The attachment was a consequence of a search conducted at the petitioner's premises. The revenue did not dispute the petitioner's claim regarding the expiry of the one-year period for provisional attachment.
Held
The Court noted that the respondent-revenue did not dispute the fact that the provisional attachment of the petitioner's bank accounts could not extend beyond one year, as stipulated by Section 83 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The revenue conceded that this one-year period had expired in July 2023. Based on this admission and the settled legal position, the Court accepted the petitioner's plea. The revenue undertook to issue necessary instructions to the concerned authorities (respondents No. 4 to 6) within one week to order the release of the provisionally attached bank accounts. Consequently, the petitioner's counsel submitted that the petition had become infructuous. The Court disposed of the petition in light of the revenue's statement and undertaking.
Key Issues
1. Whether the provisional attachment of the petitioner's bank accounts under Section 83 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, is valid beyond the statutory period of one year? The petitioner argued that Section 83 of the CGST Act, 2017, clearly stipulates that provisional attachment of property cannot exceed one year. As this period had lapsed in July 2023, the attachment was no longer valid and the bank accounts should be released. The respondent-revenue, represented by the Union of India and others, did not dispute the petitioner's contention regarding the statutory limit of one year for provisional attachment. They acknowledged the settled position of law that such attachments cannot extend beyond this period.
Sections Cited
Section 83
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
CWP-9899-2026 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Sr. No.173 CWP-9899-2026 Date of decision: 02.04.2026 M/s EGC Network Pvt. Ltd. and another ....Petitioners Versus Union of India and others ....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK SIBAL HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE LAPITA BANERJI Present: Ms. Aanchal Goyal, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Ajay Kalra, Senior Standing Counsel for the respondents. * * * DEEPAK SIBAL, J. (Oral)
Through this petition, the petitioner seeks release of its provisionally frozen bank accounts on the ground that in terms of Section 83 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, such accounts cannot be provisionally attached for more than one year which period has since lapsed.
Learned counsel appearing for the respondent – revenue does not dispute the fact and the settled position of law that the petitioner's bank accounts which were provisionally attached in pursuance to a search conducted at its premises cannot be provisionally attached beyond a period of one year which has lapsed way back in July 2023. 3. In the light of the above, Mr. Kalra submits that necessary JYOTI SHARMA 2026.04.06 18:50 I attest to
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.