2020 (11) TMI 832 - HC - GST

Provisional attachment of petitioner's Bank Account - Section 83 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 - HELD THAT - Respondent No.1 states that if directions are issued by the Court for time-bound disposal of the above representation, it will be abided by promptly. It is directed that the aforementioned representation of the Petitioner be decided by a reasoned order not later than 4th December, 2020 and the decision thereon be communicated to the Petitioner not later than 8th December, 2020. The submissions of the Petitioner in the present petition and any additional submissions the Petitioner wishes to make in writing within the next two days, shall also be taken into account while passing such order. Petition disposed off.

Summary

Issues:
1. Quashing of orders for provisional attachment of bank accounts under Section 83 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.
2. Representation made by the Petitioner under Rule 159 (5) of the Central Goods and Service Tax Rules, 2017.
3. Time-bound disposal of the representation.

Analysis:
1. The judgment pertains to the quashing of orders dated 9th November, 2020, issued by the Additional Director General, Directorate General of GST Intelligence, provisionally attaching the Petitioner's bank accounts under Section 83 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The Petitioner sought the quashing of these orders, and a detailed representation was submitted on 11th November, 2020, as per Rule 159 (5) of the Central Goods and Service Tax Rules, 2017. The Court directed that the representation be decided by a reasoned order not later than 4th December, 2020, and communicated to the Petitioner by 8th December, 2020. The Petitioner's submissions and any additional submissions within the next two days were to be considered in passing the order.

2. The Petitioner's representation under Rule 159 (5) of the Central Goods and Service Tax Rules, 2017, was a crucial aspect of the case. The Court emphasized the importance of addressing the Petitioner's representation promptly and in a reasoned manner. The representation was made in response to the impugned orders of provisional attachment of bank accounts. The Court's directive for a time-bound disposal of the representation aimed at ensuring procedural fairness and timely resolution of the matter. The Petitioner's right to seek appropriate remedies in accordance with the law if aggrieved by the decision was also acknowledged.

3. The issue of time-bound disposal of the representation was a central concern in the judgment. The Court recognized the need for expeditious resolution of the matter and set specific deadlines for deciding the Petitioner's representation and communicating the decision. By directing that the representation be decided not later than 4th December, 2020, and communicated by 8th December, 2020, the Court ensured that the Petitioner's rights were protected and that justice was served within a reasonable timeframe. The Court's emphasis on adherence to the timelines underscored the importance of procedural efficiency and fairness in the adjudicatory process.

In conclusion, the judgment addressed the quashing of orders for provisional attachment of bank accounts, the representation made by the Petitioner under the relevant rules, and the necessity for time-bound disposal of the representation to uphold procedural fairness and timely resolution of the dispute.