9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (2) TMI 827 - HC - GSTProvisional attachment of Bank Accounts - section 83 of the Gujarat Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 - Held that - A perusal of the record of the case reveals that the petitioner is not a fly by night operator and has paid duty and tax to the tune of more than rupees one hundred crore in the last year. Under the circumstances, the respondent shall explain the expediency and the rationale behind ordering attachment of all the bank accounts of the petitioner and virtually bringing its business to a grinding halt. Issue Notice returnable on 23rd January, 2019.
Issues involved: Provisional attachment of bank accounts under the Gujarat Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 without proper explanation and its impact on the petitioner's business.
Analysis: 1. The petitioner's advocate argued that six bank accounts of the petitioner were provisionally attached for the recovery of a significant sum of money under the Gujarat Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The advocate highlighted that show cause notices were issued followed by immediate provisional attachment orders. The petitioner was shown to have a substantial amount of cash in these accounts. 2. Upon reviewing the case record, it was noted that the petitioner had a history of paying duties and taxes amounting to over one hundred crore rupees in the previous year. The court questioned the rationale behind attaching all bank accounts of the petitioner, emphasizing that the petitioner was not a fraudulent entity but a legitimate business operator. The court directed the respondent to explain the necessity and justification for such extensive attachment that severely impacted the petitioner's business operations. 3. Considering the arguments presented by the petitioner's advocate, the court issued a notice returnable on 23rd January, 2019. As an interim measure, the respondent was instructed to release the attachment over the petitioner's bank accounts, provided the petitioner maintained a specified amount in one of its accounts with a designated bank. This directive aimed to alleviate the immediate financial burden on the petitioner while awaiting further clarifications and justifications from the respondent.
|
