2024 (8) TMI 454 - HC - GST

Provisional attachment of Bank Accounts - Blocking of Electronic Credit Ledger (ECL) - objection filed under Rule 159 (5) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 - HELD THAT - It is clear from the plain language of Section 83 (1) of the CGST Act, that only the Commissioner has the power to pass an order of provisional attachment under Section 83 (1) of the CGST Act. Thus, the petitioner s contention to the aforesaid effect is merited - The impugned order has been passed the Principal Additional Director General of Goods and Services Tax Intelligence. Thus, the petitioner s contention that the impugned order has not been passed by the Commissioner is unmerited. It is considered apposite to dispose of the petition by directing the Commissioner to decide the petitioner s objections as expeditiously as possible and, in any event, within three weeks from date - petition disposed off.

Summary

Issues:
1. Impugning an order under Section 83 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.
2. Blocking of Electronic Credit Ledger (ECL) amount.
3. Jurisdiction of passing the impugned order by the Commissioner.
4. Necessity and reasons for provisional attachment of the bank account.

Analysis:
1. The petitioner challenged an order under Section 83 of the CGST Act, which provisionally attached their bank account. The petitioner was also aggrieved by the blocking of a specific amount in the Electronic Credit Ledger (ECL).

2. The petitioner contended that only 'the Commissioner' could pass an order under Section 83(1) of the CGST Act. They argued that the impugned order lacked jurisdiction as it was not passed by the Commissioner and was without the necessary pre-condition of having a reason to believe that the order was essential to protect the government revenue.

3. Section 83 of the CGST Act grants the power of provisional attachment to the Commissioner. The term 'Commissioner' is defined under Sub-section (24) of Section 2, including the Commissioner of central tax and other specified officers. The notification No. 14/2017-Central Tax dated 01.07.2017 allows certain officers to exercise the powers of the Principal Chief Commissioner. In this case, the impugned order was passed by the Principal Additional Director General of Goods and Services Tax Intelligence, which was deemed appropriate.

4. The respondent's counsel assured that the reasons to believe that the provisional attachment of the bank account was necessary to protect the revenue were available and would be provided if required. The court directed the Commissioner to decide on the petitioner's objections promptly, within three weeks from the date, and disposed of the petition accordingly.