The attachment proceedings cannot be at the cost of right of provision under Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India. The impugned attachment orders shall stand vacated.
Section 83 of the CGST Act, 2017 – Provisional Attachment of bank Account– The petitioner challenged the attachment orders dated 12.01.2021 and 28.01.2021 which have been issued under Section 83. During the pendency of the investigation, the respondents have already appropriated a sum of Rs. 5.68 Crores, which were lying in the accounts of the petitioner company. The petitioner submitted that the respondents have completely strangled their business. They were employing about 15,000 employees with security guards who were deployed in various industrial units. The allegation against the petitioner company is that they have fraudulently availed ITC on fictitious invoices to discharge the GST liability of Rs. 21 Crores and investigation is still under progress. The court observed that provisional attachment of assets during the pendency of the proceedings cannot be made against future receivables. An amount of Rs. 5.68 Crores, has been appropriated. The petitioner has also agreed to remit another sum of Rs. 1 Crore. There is a mechanism provided under the Act for proper adjudication of the tax due and determination under Sections 73 and 74 of the Act. Therefore, there is no meaning in attaching the bank accounts further.
Held that:- The Hon’ble High Court directed that on deposit of Rs. One Crore, the impugned attachment orders shall stand vacated. The Respondents are directed to complete the investigation and issue appropriate SCNs as expeditiously as possible.
The attachment proceedings cannot be at the cost of right of provision under Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India. The impugned attachment orders shall stand vacated.
Section 83 of the CGST Act, 2017 – Provisional Attachment of bank Account– The petitioner challenged the attachment orders dated 12.01.2021 and 28.01.2021 which have been issued under Section 83. During the pendency of the investigation, the respondents have already appropriated a sum of Rs. 5.68 Crores, which were lying in the accounts of the petitioner company. The petitioner submitted that the respondents have completely strangled their business. They were employing about 15,000 employees with security guards who were deployed in various industrial units. The allegation against the petitioner company is that they have fraudulently availed ITC on fictitious invoices to discharge the GST liability of Rs. 21 Crores and investigation is still under progress. The court observed that provisional attachment of assets during the pendency of the proceedings cannot be made against future receivables. An amount of Rs. 5.68 Crores, has been appropriated. The petitioner has also agreed to remit another sum of Rs. 1 Crore. There is a mechanism provided under the Act for proper adjudication of the tax due and determination under Sections 73 and 74 of the Act. Therefore, there is no meaning in attaching the bank accounts further.
Held that:- The Hon’ble High Court directed that on deposit of Rs. One Crore, the impugned attachment orders shall stand vacated. The Respondents are directed to complete the investigation and issue appropriate SCNs as expeditiously as possible.