9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (1) TMI 500X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The Petitioner is before us challenging the order passed by the Respondent in attaching the bank account no. 50200006372609 vide order bearing reference no. JC-INV-C/2022-23/DRC-22/B-44 Mumbai dated 21 April 2022 and for direction to allow the operation of the bank account against the action taken by the Respondents under Section 83 of the Maharashtra Goods and Services Act, 2017. 2. Apart from ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r Zonal Unit and Ors. Writ Petition No. 2583 of 2021 dated 8 July, 2021, to contend that the Petitioner has remedy and the Petitioner should first take recourse to Rule 159(5) of the Maharashtra GST Rules and also meet the case of the Petitioner on merits. 4. The Division Bench of this Court in the case of Jaychem Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. was also dealing with an identical challenge to an action tak ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... etitioner and an order passed on the objection that was raised. The Court examined the order passed by the relevant authority and bearing in mind the facts as well as the legal position, proceeded to pass an appropriate order. 6. It is clear that sub-rule (5) of Rule 159 of the said Rules provides a remedy if any particular order of attachment under sub-rule (1) leaves a party, subject to tax, a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ould the Additional Director General refuse to release the property from attachment, a reasoned order is required to be passed and such order could be subjected to a challenge before the appropriate forum in accordance with law. 7. Since the petitioner has not taken to recourse to subrule (5) of Rule 159 of the said Rules, we decline interference at this stage. However, we grant the petitioner a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... than the one taken in Jaychem Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. 6. The grievance of the Petitioner that the bank account has remained attached for a long period of time, is to be noted but partially it is the Petitioner to blame for not taking recourse to Rule 159(5) of the Rules. Be that as it may, since the bank account is attached in April 2022, we direct if the Petitioner approaches the authority under R ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
