2022 (10) TMI 995 - HC - GST

Provisional attachment of current account of the petitioner - time limitation - Section 83 of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 - HELD THAT - The attachment as per Section 83(2) shall cease to have effect after a period of one year from date of order of attachment. Thus, pending writ petition, the impugned order has ceased to have effect, as on 15.09.2020. With this, this writ petition has been rendered infructuous. There is no further embargo on the operation of the bank account and on the petitioner resuming operations in that regard - Petition disposed off.

Summary

Issues:
1. Validity of the order of provisional attachment of the petitioner's bank account under Section 83 of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017.

Analysis:
The judgment delivered by Honourable Dr. Justice Anita Sumanth of the Madras High Court dealt with the challenge raised by the petitioner against an order issued by the Assistant Commissioner, Goods and Service Tax, attaching the petitioner's current account in ICICI Bank, Chennai. The crux of the matter revolved around the application of Section 83 of the CGST Act, 2017, which allows for provisional attachment of property, including bank accounts, to safeguard the government revenue in specific cases.

The Court highlighted that as per Section 83(2) of the CGST Act, the provisional attachment ceases to have effect after one year from the date of the order. In this case, the order in question was dated 06.09.2019, making it ineffective as of 15.09.2020. Consequently, the Court declared the writ petition as infructuous due to the expiration of the attachment period, thereby allowing the petitioner to resume operations related to the bank account without any hindrance.

The judgment emphasized that with the lapse of the attachment period, there was no legal impediment for the petitioner to operate the bank account freely. As a result, the Court disposed of the writ petition with the observation that there were no costs incurred in the proceedings. The connected miscellaneous petitions were also closed as part of the final disposition of the case.

In conclusion, the High Court of Madras, through the judgment delivered by Honourable Dr. Justice Anita Sumanth, clarified the implications of Section 83 of the CGST Act in the context of provisional attachment of assets to protect government revenue. The ruling underscored the automatic cessation of the attachment after one year, leading to the dismissal of the writ petition and allowing the petitioner to resume normal banking operations.