9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (10) TMI 1034X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the writ petitioner to move in terms of Rule 159 within a period of one week from today. Any application for revocation of provisional attachment so made may be examined and disposed of in accordance with law and preferably within a period two weeks therefrom. - HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVINDER DUDEJA For the Petitioner Through: Mr. Kanhaiya Singhal, Mr. Ujwal Ghai, Mr. Udit Bakshi and Mr. Bhuwesh Bhola, Advs. For the Respondents Through: Mr. Anurag Ojha, Sr. Standing Counsel with Mr. Subham Kumar and Mr. Dipak Raj, Advs. for R-1 R-2 ORDER PER CM APPL. 59394/2024 (Exemption) Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. This application stands disposed of. W.P.(C) 14190/2024 CM APPL. 59393/2024 (Stay of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ator or is disposing off assets to defeat the collection of tax. 19.12. The stated reason for provisional attachment the initiation of proceedings and passing of an order under Section 74 against the appellant's supplier, GM Powertech is insufficient to invoke the powers of provisional attachment against the appellant. 19.13. The third respondent has failed to show that there is a threat to the interests of the Revenue on account of the appellant's alleged involvement in the said ITC fraud of GM Powertech. 19.14 . The appellant has paid an output tax of Rs 12,49,90,267.14 (Rs 12.49 crores) for the relevant period, which is more than ITC of Rs 3.25 crores which the appellant has allegedly taken fraudulently. 19.15. Even if the Revenu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... must be guided by other provisions of the Act. 19.22. Under Section 74 of the HPGST Act, once the tax demand becomes payable, an assessee can only challenge this demand in appeal after depositing 10% of the disputed amount and the remaining demand is stayed. In contrast, the provisional attachment of 100% of the alleged amount even before the finalisation of the tax demand is contrary to the legislative intent. 19.23 . The third respondent has taken a contradictory stand with respect to collection of tax from the appellant. Even if it is admitted that the transaction between the appellant and GM Powertech was a fake transaction without actual movement of goods, it follows that the appellant cannot claim refund of ITC nor would the appellant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the order of attachment [in FORM GST DRC-22] to the concerned Revenue Authority or Transport Authority or any such Authority to place encumbrance on the said movable or immovable property, which shall be removed only on the written instructions from the Commissioner to that effect [or on expiry of a period of one year from the date of issuance of order under sub-rule (1), whichever is earlier] [and a copy of such order shall also be sent to the person whose property is being attached under Section 83]. (3) Where the property attached is of perishable or hazardous nature, [and if the person, whose property has been attached,] pays an amount equivalent to the market price of such property or the amount that is or may become payable [by such ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
