2020 (9) TMI 829 - HC - GST

Provisional attachment of factory premises and residential premises - grievance is that the authority while issuing fresh GST DRC-01A has simultaneously issued GST DRC-01 - HELD THAT - According to the learned counsel appearing for the writ applicant, his client is yet to reply to the notice issued in Form-01A. It is only thereafter that the further proceedings under GST DRC-01 could have been initiated. Our attention has been drawn to page-85 of the paper book which is the representation addressed by the writ applicant to the Assistant Commissioner of State Tax-04 (Enrocement), Surat, bringing this fact to his notice. This writ application is disposed off with a direction to the Assistant Commissioner of State Tax-04 (Enrocement), Surat respondent No.4, to immediately look into the representation dated 26th August 2020 referred above and annexed at page-85 of the paper book and take appropriate decision in accordance with law within the period of 15 days from the date of the receipt of this order.

Summary

Issues:
1. Challenge to provisional attachment order under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
2. Fresh proceedings initiated by the authority.
3. Grievance regarding simultaneous issuance of GST DRC-01A and GST DRC-01.
4. Direction sought for appropriate decision on the representation.

Analysis:
1. The writ applicant sought to quash the provisional attachment order and subsequent proceedings. In a previous round of litigation, the court remitted the matter to the authority for fresh consideration after providing an opportunity for a hearing. The court upheld the provisional attachment to protect the government's revenue interest. In the current application, the applicant raised concerns over the simultaneous issuance of GST DRC-01A and GST DRC-01 without responding to the former. The court directed the authority to review the applicant's representation and make a decision within 15 days.

2. The court emphasized the importance of due process and the opportunity for a fair hearing before any further proceedings are initiated. The authority was instructed to consider the applicant's representation and act in accordance with the law within a specified timeframe. This highlights the court's commitment to ensuring procedural fairness and adherence to legal principles in tax matters.

3. The judgment reflects the court's role in overseeing administrative actions related to tax enforcement. By addressing the applicant's grievance and providing a clear directive to the authority, the court ensures that the rights of the parties involved are respected and that decisions are made in compliance with legal requirements. The court's intervention serves to maintain the balance between the interests of the taxpayer and the government in tax proceedings.

4. The court's decision to dispose of the writ application with a specific direction to the authority demonstrates the judiciary's commitment to efficient resolution of legal disputes. By setting a timeline for the authority to act on the applicant's representation, the court ensures timely redressal of grievances and reinforces the importance of accountability in administrative decision-making. This approach underscores the judiciary's supervisory role in upholding the rule of law and safeguarding the rights of individuals in legal proceedings.