Provisional Bank Account Attachment ends Once Final Order is Passed u/s 74 of CGST Act: Supreme Court [Read Judgement]
The Petitioner’s case had failed before the High Court in the previous stage under the belief that he had engaged in suspicious transactions and fraudulent availment of ITC
![Provisional Bank Account Attachment ends Once Final Order is Passed u/s 74 of CGST Act: Supreme Court [Read Judgement]](https://www.taxscan.in/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/Bank-Account-Attachment.jpg "Provisional Bank Account Attachment ends Once Final Order is Passed u/s 74 of CGST Act: Supreme Court [Read Judgement]")
The Supreme Court of India in a recent matter laid reference to the obiter in a prior decision where it was held that a provisional bank account attachment under Section 83 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act (CGST), 2017 Act ceases to have effect once a final order under Section 74 is passed. The decision was given by the Apex Court while adjudicating a Special Leave to Appeal filed...
The Supreme Court of India in a recent matter laid reference to the obiter in a prior decision where it was held that a provisional bank account attachment under Section 83 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act (CGST), 2017 Act ceases to have effect once a final order under Section 74 is passed.
The decision was given by the Apex Court while adjudicating a Special Leave to Appeal filed by Om Prakash Gupta challenging the provisional attachment of his bank account under Section 83 of the CGST Act.
Read More: Legality of Provisional Bank Attachments Under GST: How to Draft Reply Notice
Precedingly, the Delhi High Court upheld the provisional attachment, stating that the Commissioner was not required to disclose all material considered while forming an opinion on attachment. The court observed that the investigation had revealed Gupta had engaged in suspicious transactions and fraudulently availed Input Tax Credit (ITC) worth ₹87,54,083. It further noted that the Show Cause Notice issued to Gupta under Section 74 of the CGST Act detailed allegations of tax evasion through non-existent suppliers.
AOR Yogesh Subhash Kolte, Senior Advocate Tarun Gulati, Sumit K Batra, Manish Khurana and Priyanka Jindal appearing for the Petitioner contended that the a final order under Section 74 of the CGST Act had been passed during the interregnum period and that the Petitioner is in the process of challenging the final order in accordance with law.
A bench composed by Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Justice R. Mahadevan echoed the observations made by the Supreme Court in the case of M/s Radha Krishan Industries versus State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors. (2021) had “categorically said that once the final order is passed under Section 74 of the CGST Act, the provisional attachment comes to an end.”.
Read More: Supreme Court on Provisional Attachment under GST Laws
In light of the observations made, the Supreme Court proceeded to dispose of the Special Leave Petition and all related pending applications.
To Read the full text of the Order CLICK HERE
Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
