Provisional Attachment under CGST Act Ceases After Expiry Of One Year: Rajasthan High Court

Mariya Paliwala

5 March 2022 3:37 PM IST

  • Provisional Attachment under CGST Act Ceases After Expiry Of One Year: Rajasthan High Court

    The Rajasthan High Court has ruled that the provisional attachment under CGST Act ceases to have effect after expiry of one year. The division bench headed by the Chief Justice Akil Kureshi and Justice Sudesh Bansal while listing the matter on March 22, 2022 stayed the provisional attachment. The bank account of the petitioner/assessee was placed under provisional attachment by an...

    The Rajasthan High Court has ruled that the provisional attachment under CGST Act ceases to have effect after expiry of one year.

    The division bench headed by the Chief Justice Akil Kureshi and Justice Sudesh Bansal while listing the matter on March 22, 2022 stayed the provisional attachment.

    The bank account of the petitioner/assessee was placed under provisional attachment by an order in exercise of powers under Section 83 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act (CGST Act) by the respondents.

    Counsel for the petitioner pointed out that in terms of sub-section (2) of Section 83 that the provisional attachment cannot survive beyond a period of one year.

    Section 83 of the CGST Act pertains to provisional attachment to protect the revenue in certain cases. In sub-section (1) of Section 83 the commissioner is empowered to order provisional attachment of the property of the assessee including bank account where proceedings under Chapters XII, XIV and XV are pending and the commissioner is of the opinion that for the purpose of protecting the interest of government revenue it is necessary so to do. Sub-section (2) of Section 83 provides that every provisional attachment shall cease to have effect after expiry of a period of one year from the date of order made under sub-section (1).

    Case Title: M/s B.r. Construction Company Versus Additional Director

    Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Raj) 87

    Case No.: D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2086/2021

    Counsel For Appellant: Advocate Jatin Harjai and Advocate Mohit Kumar Soni

    Counsel For Respondent: Advocate Mahi Yadav

    Click Here To Read/Download Order

    Next Story