2021 (4) TMI 1093 - HC - GST

Refund of unutilized input tax credit - Validity of the attachment of the bank account of the petitioner - HELD THAT - Without expressing any opinion on the stand taken by the respondents at this stage, we are of the view that petitioner may file rejoinder affidavit to the stand taken by the respondents so that the case can be decided one way or the other. Let the rejoinder affidavit be filed within two weeks.

Summary

Issues:
1. Legality and validity of bank account attachment under section 83 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.
2. Allegations of fraudulent refund claim under section 54 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.
3. Directors' admission to fraud perpetration.
4. Filing of rejoinder affidavit by the petitioner.
5. Order to prevent appropriation of credited amount.
6. Production of contemporaneous record by respondent's counsel.
7. Next date of hearing.

Analysis:
The High Court of BOMBAY heard arguments regarding the legality and validity of the attachment of the petitioner's bank account under section 83 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The petitioner contested that the conditions for invoking jurisdiction under this section were not met, rendering the exercise of power invalid. Respondent Nos.1 and 2 requested an adjournment, and the matter was listed for further hearing. The respondents alleged that the petitioner fraudulently obtained a refund of unutilized input tax credit under section 54 of the Act, resulting in ?5.20 crores being credited to the petitioner's bank account. Proceedings under sections 67 and 74 were initiated, with two directors admitting to the fraud.

The Court refrained from expressing an opinion on the respondents' stand at that stage and directed the petitioner to file a rejoinder affidavit to respond to the allegations made by the respondents. A timeline of two weeks was given for filing the rejoinder affidavit. Additionally, the Court ordered that the respondents should not appropriate the credited amount in the petitioner's account until further proceedings. The respondents were instructed to produce the contemporaneous record in original on the next date of the hearing, which was scheduled for 9th February 2021. The order was to be digitally signed for action by concerned parties upon receipt of a digitally signed copy via fax or email.