GST Payer Misrepresents Date of Receival of Provisional Attachment Letter: Delhi HC Recalls Order Permitting Bank A/c Operation [Read Order]
The High Court withdrew its earlier permission to operate bank accounts due to misrepresentation of notice receipt and directed the petitioner to maintain a balance of Rs. 1 crore for GST purposes.
![GST Payer Misrepresents Date of Receival of Provisional Attachment Letter: Delhi HC Recalls Order Permitting Bank A/c Operation [Read Order]](https://images.taxscan.in/h-upload/2025/11/28/2108566-gst-payer-misrepresents-site-image.webp "GST Payer Misrepresents Date of Receival of Provisional Attachment Letter: Delhi HC Recalls Order Permitting Bank A/c Operation [Read Order]")
In the recent ruling, the Delhi High Court recalled its earlier order allowing the petitioner to operate its bank accounts after observing that the petitioner misrepresented the date of receival of the provisional attachment letter issued by the GST ( Goods and Services Tax ) Department.
The Court directed the petitioner to file an affidavit clarifying the misrepresentation and maintain Rs. 1 crore balance, while asking the GST Department to provide proper reasons for the attachment.
The Petitioner, Ebix Technologies Limited Formerly Known as Ebixcash Limited, was allowed to operate its bank accounts, provided a balance of Rs. 1 Crore was maintained. During the previous hearing on November 7, 2025, the Court had issued notice, directed the filing of a short affidavit, production of the original DGGI Meerut file and the personal presence of Ramakant Tiwari.
Further, at the subsequent hearing on November 11, 2025, the Respondent No. 2 (GST Department) submitted an affidavit and documents asserting that the impugned Provisional Attachment letter, dated September 25, 2025, was sent via speed post and delivered to the Petitioner on October 10, 2025. This contradicted the Petitioner's claim of receiving the letter only on WhatsApp on November 4, 2025.
The Respondent also clarified that attaching all bank accounts with the same PAN is standard practice under GST DRC-22, which is the provisional attachment form under Section 83 of the Central Goods and Services Tax, 2017.
The Section 83 of the Central Goods and Services Tax, 2017 explained that: Provisional attachment to protect revenue in certain cases.
“(1) Where during the pendency of any proceedings under section 62 or section 63 or section 64 or section 67 or section 73 or section 74, the Commissioner is of the opinion that for the purpose of protecting the interest of the Government revenue, it is necessary so to do, he may, by order in writing attach provisionally any property, including bank account, belonging to the taxable person in such manner as may be prescribed.
(2) Every such provisional attachment shall cease to have effect after the expiry of a period of one year from the date of the order made under sub-section (1).”
Additionally, Respondent No.3 i.e., ICICI Bank has produced an order of the Bombay High Court in Commercial Arbitration Petition (L) No. 25579/2024 titled Ashok Kumar Goel & Anr. v. EbixCash Limited & Ors, wherein an injunction has been granted, in an arbitration matter and restraining the dealing with or encumbering of movable assets, including bank balances, of the Respondents in that case.
The Counsel for the Petitioner, submitted that the impugned letter was received for the first time on WhatsApp on 4th November, 2025 and not before. Further, he submitted that he would seek instructions in the matter.
The Two-Member Bench consisted of Justice Prathiba M. Singh and Justice Shail Jain, heard and reviewed the matter.
The High Court, after reviewing the GST Department's dak register, prima facie found that the impugned letter was indeed booked on October 7, 2025, sent on October 8, 2025, and delivered on October 10, 2025, to Chandan Bhardwaj, Director of Finance, M/s Ebix Technologies Ltd. The Court noted a prima facie misrepresentation by the Petitioner regarding the receipt of the letter and deemed the Bombay High Court order highly relevant.
Consequently, the Court recalled its previous order dated November 7, 2025, which had permitted the Petitioner to operate its bank accounts. The Petitioner, specifically Chandan Bhardwaj, was directed to file an affidavit within two weeks. The GST Department was instructed to communicate proper reasons to the Petitioner within one week, while the requirement to maintain a balance of Rs. 1 Crore remained.
Thus, the matter was listed for further hearing on November 28, 2025.
