2023 (2) TMI 651 - HC - GST

Seeking release of blocked funds in the petitioner's Bank Account - alleged non-payment of GST in respect of certain transactions - excess availment of ITC - HELD THAT - Since a specific request has not been made by the petitioner for release of the blocked funds in the petitioner Bank Account, maintained with the fourth respondent, the petitioner will have to give a fresh representation to the second respondent seeking for release of the blocked funds in the petitioner's bank account, maintained with the fourth respondent Bank. No prejudice would be caused to the respondents if the petitioner's representation seeking for release of the blocked funds in the petitioner's Bank Account, maintained with the fourth respondent is considered, on merits and in accordance with law, after giving due consideration to the submissions made by the petitioner in the affidavit filed in support of this writ petition, which have been narrated supra, within a time frame to be fixed by this Court. This Court directs the petitioner to submit a fresh representation to the second respondent stating their grievance that have been raised in the affidavit filed in support of this writ petition, within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order - On receipt of the said representation, the second respondent shall pass final orders, on merits and in accordance with law, after giving due consideration to the grievances raised by the petitioner in their representation, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of the said representation. Petition disposed off.

Summary

Issues:
Mandamus for release of blocked funds in petitioner's bank account without due process of law.

Analysis:
The writ petition sought a Mandamus directing the second respondent to release blocked funds in the petitioner's bank account and refrain from blocking funds without following due process. The petitioner faced issues due to technical glitches in the GST Portal while filing GSTR-3B for July 2017, resulting in discrepancies in ITC availed. Summonses and notices were issued by the first and second respondents regarding alleged tax shortfalls and non-payment for transactions in July 2017. Despite attending enquiries and providing details, the petitioner's funds in the bank account were blocked without receiving a copy of the notice explaining the block. The petitioner's representation to release the blocked funds was not addressed adequately, leading to the writ petition.

The petitioner's counsel highlighted the potential adverse impact on the petitioner's business if the funds remained blocked. The Court noted that the petitioner had not specifically requested the release of blocked funds in the bank account with the fourth respondent. It directed the petitioner to submit a fresh representation to the second respondent articulating their grievances within a week. The Court emphasized that the representation should be considered on merits and in accordance with the law, ensuring no prejudice to the respondents. The second respondent was instructed to make a final decision on the representation within four weeks, taking into account the petitioner's submissions.

In conclusion, the Court disposed of the writ petition with the direction for the petitioner to submit a fresh representation regarding the blocked funds. Until a decision was made on the representation, the respondents were prohibited from attaching funds in any other bank account related to the subject demand. The judgment aimed to address the petitioner's concerns regarding the blocked funds and ensure a fair and lawful resolution within a specified timeframe.