9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (8) TMI 239X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Supreme Court made observations to the effect that such drastic powers must be exercised only where it is necessary. Considering that the wide adverse ramifications such orders have, this Court, has in a number of decisions, held that the power under Section 83 of the CGST Act can be exercised only subject to the conditions, as specified therein, being fully satisfied. No order under Section 83 of the CGST Act can be passed by any officer other than the Commissioner and this can be done only if he is satisfied that it is necessary to pass such an order for protecting the interest of Revenue - In the present case, respondent no. 2 has, by a letter addressed to the bank seeking information, also directed freezing the petitioner s bank ac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ch respondent no. 2 had issued the impugned communication. 3. Mr. Ojha, learned counsel appearing for the respondents is unable to point out any provision under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (hereafter the CGST Act ) permitting respondent no. 2 to issue such a communication directing the Bank to freeze the bank account. He has referred to the provision of Section 83 of the CGST Act, which empowers the Commissioner to issue an order for provisional attachment of assets including bank accounts. However, an order of provisional attachment of assets under Section 83 of the CGST Act can be issued only if the Commissioner is of the view that it is necessary to protect the interest of the Revenue. However, admittedly, in the pre ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion in terms of the Rule 159(5) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 (hereafter the CGST Rules ) assuming that the impugned communication was passed under Section 83 of the CGST Act. However, the said objections were not considered and admittedly, the respondents did not furnish any response to the said application. 8. Mr. Ojha submits that the order freezing the petitioner s bank account would cease to be operative since a period of one year has since elapsed. The said contention is premised on the basis that the impugned communication is an order, under Section 83 of the CGST Act, however, no such order was passed by the Commissioner. It is conceded that the order in Form DRC-22 has not been issued. The impugned communic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
