The Madras HIgh court held that proceedings of bank attachment will not stand in the way of the revenue taking resort to Section 83 of CGST Act which pertains to the Attachment of Property, yet again.
The petitioner, M/s.Mutharamman & Co. is an assessee under the provisions of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 and challenges proceedings issued by the respondent attaching the petitioner’s bank accounts in terms of Section 83 of CGST Act, based upon proceedings for search and seizure launched as against the petitioner in terms of Section 67 of the Act.
The impugned attachment under Section 83 of the CGST Act is without any statutory sanction as it is consequent upon action under Section 67 of the Act, which deals with the power of the authorities to engage in inspection, search and seizure. The scope of Section 87 is wholly based upon the ‘opinion’ of the concerned Commissioner to the effect that the interests of the revenue were to be safeguarded and sanctioning coercive recovery proceedings of the nature of bank attachment in a particular case.
Section 83 provides for the provisional attachment of any property including bank accounts belonging to the taxable person with the avowed object of protecting the revenue, in certain cases.
The single bench of Justice Anita Sumanth ruled that the opinion of the Senior Intelligence Officer in this case is far more cryptic, revealing total non- application of mind and merely repeating what Principal Additional Director General has stated in his request for sanction. The impugned order of attachment is set aside. The respondents will complete the process of assessment within a period of six weeks.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan AdFree. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates.
