Petitioner | M/S Global Enterprise |
Respondent | Commissioner Central Goods And Service Tax, Delhi East & Anr. |
Decision by | Delhi High Court |
Date of order or Judgement | 29-March-2022 |
Citation no. | 2022 (3) GSTPanacea 28 HC Delhi |
Hon’ble Judge | Justice Rajiv Shakdher |
Decision | In Favour of Assessee |
Efficacy of Order-The impugned order issued under Section 83 of the CGST Act, cannot remain efficacious, beyond the period of one year commencing from the date of the order.
Efficacy of Order-Facts of the Case
Efficacy of Order-This writ petition is directed against order dated 26.03.2021, passed by the Commissioner, Central Goods and Service Tax and Central Excise (CGST and CX), Delhi East. Via the impugned order, the petitioner’s current account stands frozen.
This is the second round of litigation for the petitioner.
The petitioner’s account was frozen for the first time via provisional attachment order dated 19.05.2020, which was, concededly, quashed by this court via order dated 22.03.2021, passed in W.P.(C) 5344/2020.
The petitioner’s grievance, as noted above, is that immediately, after this Court had quashed the earlier provisional attachment order on 22.03.2021, a fresh order was passed on 26.03.2021.
Argument Before Court
Efficacy of Order-As per the assertions made in the rejoinder filed by the petitioner, the proceedings under Section 74 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 are no longer pending, as an adjudication order has been passed on 08.09.2021.
It was submitted by the petitioner that he has preferred an appeal, against the order dated 08.09.2021, and deposited 10 per cent of the tax demanded by the respondent.
Delhi High Court Held
Efficacy of Order-Given the aforesaid position, the impugned order dated 26.03.2021, which has been issued, concededly, under Section 83 of the CGST Act, cannot remain efficacious, beyond the period of one year commencing from the date of the order.
Section 83 :- Provisional attachment to protect revenue in certain cases.—
(1) Where during the pendency of any proceedings under section 62 or section 63 or section 64 or section 67 or section 73 or section 74, the Commissioner is of the opinion that for the purpose of protecting the interest of the Government revenue, it is necessary so to do, he may, by order in writing attach provisionally any property, including bank account, belonging to the taxable person in such manner as may be prescribed.
(2) Every such provisional attachment shall cease to have effect after the expiry of a period of one year from the date of the order made under sub-section (1).
Honorable HC held that the impugned order dated 26.03.2021 has lost its efficacy, and, therefore, the attachment should stand lifted.
The writ petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms.
The respondents, will also ensure that a copy of this order is served on the aforementioned bank i.e., Axis Bank Limited, F-2/25 at Krishna Nagar, Delhi-110051.
Download PDF
M/S Global Enterprise
For Reference Visit:
Delhi High Court