Observations in Release of Provisional Attachment of Bank Accounts not to Influence GST Proceedings: Telangana HC [Read Order]

Provisional - Attachment - Bank - Accounts - GST - Proceedings- Telangana - HC - TAXSCAN

In a major ruling the Telangana High Court observed that the observations in the release of Provisional Attachment of Bank Accounts should not influence GST Proceedings.

The petitioner in the present matter is Creative Koven Developers LLP.

The petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India assailing the legality and validity of the notices issued by respondent addressed to the bankers of the petitioner provisionally attaching bank accounts of the petitioner under Section 83 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (CGST Act).

The Telangana passed an order on 13.03.2023, wherein the Court directed the respondent to pass an appropriate order under Rule 159 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 as the petitioner has deposited more than Rs.5 crores and as per Rule 159 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017, more particularly SubRule (5), petitioner has filed objection before the respondent against the invocation of power under Section 83 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.

Later the Commissioner has also released the bank accounts of the petitioner from provisional attachment.

S.Ravi, Senior Counsel for the petitioner submits that in the course of the narration, Commissioner of Ranga Reddy GST Commissionerate has made certain observations, which may come in the way of a fair adjudication in the assessment proceedings.

The Coram comprising of Chief Justice Ujjal Bhuyan and Justice N Tukaramji, observed that “Needless to say, observations made by the Commissioner of Ranga Reddy GST Commissionerate while passing the order was in the context of examining the objection raised by the petitioner to provisional attachment of bank accounts under Section 83 of the CGST Act and certainly those would not influence the assessment proceedings that may be initiated against the petitioner, which will be done in accordance with law.”

Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the Judgment

Support our journalism by subscribing to TaxscanAdFree. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates.

taxscan-loader