9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (8) TMI 618 - HC - GSTValidity of order of provisional attachment - dismissal of its writ petition against the similar order of provisional attachment by the Supreme Court of India - principles of res-judicata - HELD THAT - Considering the fact that against the earlier provisional attachment order dated 03.02.2021 relating to the same proceedings under the Act, 2017 during pendency of the Writ Petition No. 5804 (MB) of 2021 2021 (8) TMI 596 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT before this Court, wherein also the said order was under challenge, the petitioner filed a writ petition before Hon'ble Supreme Court of India as noticed hereinabove, and the same was dismissed on merits, as is evident from the observations made therein, and also considering the fact that the subsequent order of provisional attachment dated 25.02.2021 was available with the petitioner during the pendency of the proceedings before this Court as also before the Supreme Court of India, as it had been annexed with the counter affidavit of the opposite parties in Writ Petition No. 5804 (MB) of 2021, the burden is heavy upon the petitioner's counsel to explain as to how this petition is maintainable against the order dated 25.02.2021; firstly on account of dismissal of its writ petition against the similar order of provisional attachment by the Supreme Court of India on 01.07.2021, which infact, had been filed in May, 2021; and secondly, as to why it should not be treated as barred by the principles of constructive res judicata, and/ or the principles contained in the Order II Rule 2 C.P.C. List this case on 20.08.2021 as fresh.
Issues:
Challenge to provisional attachment order dated 25.02.2021 under Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017; Maintainability of the petition after dismissal of similar petition by Supreme Court; Application of principles of constructive res judicata and Order II Rule 2 C.P.C. Analysis: The petitioner challenged a provisional attachment order dated 25.02.2021 under the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017, seeking ancillary reliefs. Previously, the petitioner had filed a writ petition against a similar order dated 03.02.2021, which was dismissed by the Supreme Court with costs imposed. The High Court noted the dismissal of the earlier writ petition and the subsequent provisional attachment order dated 25.02.2021. The Court emphasized that the petitioner had the opportunity to challenge the subsequent order during the pendency of the proceedings before both the High Court and the Supreme Court. The burden was placed on the petitioner's counsel to justify the maintainability of the current petition against the order dated 25.02.2021, considering the dismissal of the earlier petition by the Supreme Court and the principles of constructive res judicata and Order II Rule 2 C.P.C. The Court scheduled the case for further hearing on 20.08.2021. In the previous writ petition, the petitioner challenged an order dated 03.02.2021, freezing their account under the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017. The petitioner contended that the Deputy Director lacked jurisdiction to issue such an order. However, the opposite parties informed the Court that the same order was challenged before the Supreme Court, which dismissed the petition with costs imposed. Subsequently, another order dated 25.02.2021 was passed by the Additional Director, freezing the same account. The High Court, considering the facts and the dismissal of the Supreme Court petition, found no reason to entertain the writ petition challenging the earlier order dated 03.02.2021. The Court dismissed the petition without prejudice to the petitioner's rights to challenge the subsequent orders unless there was a legal impediment. The Supreme Court dismissed a writ petition filed by the petitioner, challenging the provisional attachment order dated 03.02.2021, with costs imposed. The Court found no grounds to entertain the matter and dismissed the petition. The Special Leave Petition was also dismissed. The High Court noted the dismissal of the Supreme Court petition and the subsequent filing of a writ petition challenging the order dated 25.02.2021. The Court emphasized the burden on the petitioner's counsel to explain the maintainability of the current petition in light of the dismissal of the Supreme Court petition and the principles of constructive res judicata and Order II Rule 2 C.P.C. The case was scheduled for further hearing.
|
