#provisional attachment

[gstindiaguide-blog1]

Provisional attachment order quashed as it automatically lapsed after one year; Court leaves open challenge to repeated attachment of cash-credit accounts

ANANYA METAL AND ALLOYS v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Delhi High Court | W.P.(C) 16133/2023 | Judgment dated: 21.02.2024Category: Provisional Attachment – Section 83 CGST ActRelevant Provisions: Section 83(1), Section 83(2) of the CGST Act, 2017 FACTS (Paras 1–5) The petitioner challenged a provisional attachment order dated 04.08.2022 issued under Section 83(1) of the CGST Act, attaching its cash…

Provisional attachment order quashed as it automatically lapsed after one year; Court leaves open challenge to repeated attachment of cash-credit accounts

[gstindiaguide-blog1]

Seized electronic devices directed to be returned within statutory limits as the Court held that Section 67(3) mandates release within 30 days of notice and authorities cannot indefinitely retain goods or withhold data copies from the taxpayer.

Case Title, Court, Petition No., Category, Sections AIMLAY Private Limited & Ors. v. Commissioner of Central Tax (Delhi West) & Ors.Delhi High CourtW.P.(C) 6836/2024Category: Search & Seizure – Return of Seized Goods & Devices; Provisional Attachment of Bank AccountsRelevant Provisions: Sections 67(2), 67(3), 67(5) of the CGST Act, 2017 Facts (Paras 1–7, 9–17) The petitioners challenged two sets…

Seized electronic devices directed to be returned within statutory limits as the Court held that Section 67(3) mandates release within 30 days of notice and authorities cannot indefinitely retain goods or withhold data copies from the taxpayer.

[gstindiaguide-blog1]

Refund not ordered as alleged coercion was disputed; Court holds refund claim must follow statutory process even though deposit was made during search proceedings.

Case Summary: Refund of deposit declined as Court holds coercion a disputed fact and directs remedy under statutory refund mechanism Case Title: AIMLAY Private Limited (Through Director Rakesh Gupta) & Ors. v. Commissioner of Central Tax (Delhi West) & Ors.Court: High Court of DelhiPetition No.: W.P.(C) 4273/2024Date of Judgment: 20.08.2024Relevant Provisions: Section 67(2), 67(3), 67(5) –…

Refund not ordered as alleged coercion was disputed; Court holds refund claim must follow statutory process even though deposit was made during search proceedings.

[gstindiaguide-blog1]

Case Summary: Provisional attachment lifted as attachment order lapsed on expiry of statutory one-year period Case Title: Aashna Singhal v. Principal Commissioner of GST & Ors.Court: High Court of DelhiPetition No.: W.P.(C) 7438/2024Date of Judgment: 24.05.2024Relevant Statute: Section 83 & Section 83(2) of the CGST Act, 2017Category: Provisional Attachment / Bank Account Attachment under…

[gstindiaguide-blog1]

Bank account blocking under Section 83 directed to be reconsidered as continuation of attachment is permissible only if statutory pre-conditions persist and attachment cannot operate beyond one year.

Case Summary Eunike General Trading v. Commissioner of Goods and Service Tax, West DelhiDelhi High Court | W.P.(C) 3209/2023 | Decision dated 16 March 2023Issue: Provisional Attachment under Section 83 – Refund Blocking Facts of the Case (Paras 1–9) The petitioner received a sanctioned refund of ₹34,48,080, credited into its bank account (para 1). Subsequently, during audit and review, the…

[gstindiaguide-blog1]

Provisional attachment of bank accounts quashed as petitioners were neither taxable persons nor persons covered under Section 122(1A), rendering the action ultra vires Section 83 of the CGST Act.

Sakshi Bahl & Anr. v. Principal Additional Director General, DGGIDelhi High Court | W.P.(C) 3986/2023 | Judgment dated 29.03.2023 | Issue: Provisional Attachment under Section 83 of CGST Act Court, Case & Statutory Matrix Case Title: Sakshi Bahl & Anr. v. Principal Additional Director General, DGGI Court: High Court of Delhi Petition No.: W.P.(C) 3986/2023 Judgment Date: 29 March…

[gstindiaguide-blog1]

Provisional attachment of bank account quashed as the Meerut Commissioner lacked territorial jurisdiction and failed to record any tangible material justifying attachment under Section 83 of the CGST Act.

Case Summary: Sidhivinayak Chemtech Pvt. Ltd. v. Principal Commissioner, CGST, Meerut (W.P.(C) 17547/2022, Delhi High Court, 16.05.2023) Case Classification under GST Act, 2017 Category: Power of Provisional Attachment / Jurisdiction / Protection of RevenueRelevant Provisions: Section 83 (Provisional Attachment), Section 122(1A), Section 67, Section 2(24), Section 3 & 5 of the CGST Act; Rule 159…

[gstindiaguide-blog1]

Provisional attachment quashed as continuation beyond one year under Section 83(2) rendered the orders legally inoperative

Case Summary Case Details Case Title: Tarun Gulati v. Union of India & Ors. Court: Delhi High Court Petition No.: W.P.(C) 11229/2022 Date of Judgment: 09 August 2023 Relevant Provision: Section 83(2), CGST Act, 2017 (Provisional Attachment – Time Limit) Category of Dispute: Provisional Attachment of Bank Accounts Facts (with para references) The petitioner assailed four sequential orders…