9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (3) TMI 616 - HC - GSTProvisional attachment of property - time limitation for such attachment - Section 83 of the Gujarat Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 - HELD THAT - The provisional attachment would cease to have effect after the expiry of a period of one year from the date of the order made under Subsection (1). Mr.Joshi, the learned AGP after taking instructions from the concerned Department makes a statement that the order of provisional attachment has not been renewed or no fresh order has been passed - In such circumstances as on date, it cannot be said that the account of the writ-applicant is under any attachment. Application disposed off.
Issues:
Challenge to order of provisional attachment under Section 83 of the Gujarat Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. Analysis: The judgment by the High Court of Gujarat, delivered by Mr. J.B. Pardiwala, addressed a writ application challenging the legality and validity of an order of provisional attachment dated 24th September 2018 under Section 83 of the GGST Act. The writ-applicant sought to quash the impugned order and lift the attachment on their bank account held with HDFC Bank Limited. The Court noted that the impugned order had expired as per Section 83(2) of the Act, which states that provisional attachment ceases to have effect after one year from the date of the order. The Assistant Government Pleader confirmed that the attachment had not been renewed or a fresh order passed, leading the Court to conclude that the account was no longer under attachment. Consequently, the Court directed the bank to allow the writ-applicant to operate their account, disposing of the writ-application and making the rule absolute. This judgment provides clarity on the statutory limitation of provisional attachments under the GGST Act, emphasizing that such attachments automatically cease to have effect after one year unless renewed or a fresh order is passed. The Court's decision ensures that the writ-applicant's rights are upheld, and the bank is directed to permit the operation of the previously attached account. The ruling highlights the importance of adherence to statutory provisions and the consequences of failing to renew or extend provisional attachments within the specified timeframe.
|
