In the absence of any proceedings pending as on date against the writ-applicant under the provisions of the GST Act as referred to under Section83 of the Act, the order of provisional attachment could not have been passed.
Section 83 of the CGST Act, 2017— Provisional Attachment of Bank Accounts—–The applicant prayed for quashing the attachment order and to direct the respondents to defreeze/ detach the Current Bank Account from provisional attachment under Section83. The applicant, a Proprietary Firm acts as a commission agent. The respondent passed an order of provisional attachment of the bank account on the ground that some action was taken by the authority against few other individuals who may be involved with the applicant in the business. The court observed that no proceedings under Section 62 or Section63 or Section64 or Section67 or Section73 or Section74 of the Act have been initiated or pending against the applicant. In the absence of pendency of any such proceedings, the respondent could not have invoked Section83.
Held that:- The Hon’ble High Court quashed the order of provisional attachment.
In the absence of any proceedings pending as on date against the writ-applicant under the provisions of the GST Act as referred to under Section83 of the Act, the order of provisional attachment could not have been passed.
Section 83 of the CGST Act, 2017— Provisional Attachment of Bank Accounts—–The applicant prayed for quashing the attachment order and to direct the respondents to defreeze/ detach the Current Bank Account from provisional attachment under Section83. The applicant, a Proprietary Firm acts as a commission agent. The respondent passed an order of provisional attachment of the bank account on the ground that some action was taken by the authority against few other individuals who may be involved with the applicant in the business. The court observed that no proceedings under Section 62 or Section63 or Section64 or Section67 or Section73 or Section74 of the Act have been initiated or pending against the applicant. In the absence of pendency of any such proceedings, the respondent could not have invoked Section83.
Held that:- The Hon’ble High Court quashed the order of provisional attachment.