Skylark Infra Engineering Private Limited vs. Additional Director General, Directorate General Of GST Intelligence And Others
Held
The Court directed that the Petitioner's representation, dated 11th November, 2020, be decided by a reasoned order by 4th December, 2020. The decision was to be communicated to the Petitioner by 8th December, 2020. The Court also stipulated that the submissions made by the Petitioner in the present petition, along with any additional written submissions the Petitioner might file within two days, should be considered while passing the order. The Petitioner was informed that if aggrieved by the subsequent order, they could pursue appropriate legal remedies. The Court did not decide on the merits of the provisional attachment itself, but rather on the procedural aspect of its disposal.
Facts
The Petitioner, Skylark Infra Engineering Pvt. Ltd., filed a writ petition challenging orders dated 9th November, 2020, issued by the Additional Director General, Directorate General of GST Intelligence (Respondent No. 1). These orders provisionally attached the Petitioner's bank accounts under Section 83 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. Following these orders, the Petitioner submitted a detailed representation on 11th November, 2020, under Rule 159(5) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017. The Respondent No. 1's counsel stated that they would abide by any time-bound directions from the Court for the disposal of this representation.
Key Issues
1. Whether the Court should direct the time-bound disposal of the Petitioner's representation against the provisional attachment of bank accounts under Section 83 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, and Rule 159(5) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017? Petitioner's Argument: The Petitioner sought to quash the provisional attachment orders and implicitly argued for a prompt and reasoned decision on their representation. Respondent's Argument: The Respondent No. 1, through its counsel, agreed to abide by any directions issued by the Court for the time-bound disposal of the Petitioner's representation.
Sections Cited
Section 83, Rule 159(5)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
[CWP-19883-2020]
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
109
CWP No. 19883 of 2020
Date of Decision: 24th November, 2020
Skylark Infra Engineering Pvt. Ltd. ....Petitioner
VERSUS
Additional Director General, DGGI and others ....Respondent
CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR
JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN
Present: Mr. Jagmohan Bansal, Advocate with Mr. Ruchir Bhatia, Advocate for the Petitioner.
Mr. Anshuman Chopra, Advocate for Respondent No1. *******
Dr. S. Muralidhar, J.
The Petitioner prays for quashing orders dated 9th November, 2020 (annexed as Annexures P-3 to P-5) issued by the Additional Director General, Directorate General of GST Intelligence (Respondent No. 1) under Section 83 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, provisionally attaching the Petitioner’s bank accounts.
Against the above impugned orders dated 9th November, 2020 of provisional attachment of the Petitioner’s bank accounts, a detailed representation dated 11th November, 2020 has been made by the Petitioner under Rule 159 (5) of the Central Goods and Service Tax Rules, 2017. 3. Mr. Anshuman
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.