Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
+ Post an Article
Post a New Article
Title :
0/200 char
Description :
Max 0 char
Category :
Co Author :

In case of Co-Author, You may provide Username as per TMI records

Delete Reply

Are you sure you want to delete your reply beginning with '' ?

Delete Issue

Are you sure you want to delete your Issue titled: '' ?

Articles

Back

All Articles

Advanced Search
Reset Filters
Search By:
Search by Text :
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms
Select Date:
FromTo
Category :
Sort By:
Relevance Date

Delhi HC holds Provisional Attachment of Bank Accounts Unsustainable Upon Filing of GST Appeal with Pre-Deposit

Bimal jain
Provisional bank account attachment unsustainable once appeal filed with Section 107(6) pre-deposit; Section 107(7) stay applies A high court held that provisional attachment of a taxpayer's bank accounts under recovery proceedings is unsustainable once an appeal against the adjudication order is filed with the mandatory pre-deposit required by Section 107(6) of the CGST Act, because Section 107(7) deems recovery proceedings stayed. The taxpayer's accounts, attached in connection with alleged wrongful input tax credit claims, were ordered released and banking operations restored. The court rejected the revenue's contention of fraud as insufficient to override the statutory stay, aligning with prior authority on the territorial effect of appellate filings. (AI Summary)

The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Benito Operations And Technologies Pvt. Ltd. Versus Deputy Excise And Taxation Commissioner ST Gurgaon North. - 2025 (8) TMI 1202 - DELHI HIGH COURT held that once an appeal has been filed against an adjudication order, along with the mandatory pre-deposit as required under Section 107(6) of the CGST Act. The provisional attachment of bank accounts under Section 83 cannot be sustained and is to be set aside.

Facts:

Benito Operations and Technologies Pvt. Ltd. ('the Petitioner') is a company registered in Delhi, whose bank accounts in Gurgaon were provisionally attached by the Deputy Excise and Taxation Commissioner, Gurgaon North ('the Respondent') in connection with alleged wrongful availment of input tax credit (“ITC”) and consequent tax recovery efforts.

The Petitioner contended that the adjudication order forming the basis for the attachment had already been appealed under Section 107 of the CGST Act, and that the mandatory pre-deposit was made. As such, per Section 107(7), the filing of appeal resulted in an automatic stay on the recovery of the disputed demand and the attachment was legally unsustainable.

The Respondent contended that the allegations against the Petitioner involved deliberate ITC fraud and evasion, further asserting that the Petitioner’s registration and operations indicated a design to avoid liability imposed on a related entity being investigated for similar offenses. The attachment action was, therefore, proper, and the jurisdiction of the Delhi High Court was also questioned.

Aggrieved by the freezing of its bank accounts, the Petitioner approached the Court by writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, seeking relief against not only the recovery action but also the loss of business operations.

Issue:

Whether the provisional attachment of bank accounts to recover demand under an adjudication order can be sustained when an appeal has been filed with pre-deposit under Section 107 of the CGST Act, 2017?

Held:

The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Benito Operations And Technologies Pvt. Ltd. Versus Deputy Excise And Taxation Commissioner ST Gurgaon North. - 2025 (8) TMI 1202 - DELHI HIGH COURT held as under:

  • Observed that, under Section 107(7) of the CGST Act, once an appeal is filed with the requisite pre-deposit, recovery of the balance amount and all consequential enforcement actions are automatically stayed.
  • Noted that in the present case, both the adjudication order and its subject matter have been challenged in appeal, and the Petitioner has complied with deposit requirements.
  • Observed that similar principles were affirmed by the Calcutta High Court in M/s Arramva Corporation & Ors. Versus The Additional Director General & Ors. - 2023 (12) TMI 1054 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURTregarding territorial jurisdiction and the effect of appeal filing.
  • Held that, the orders attaching the Petitioner’s bank accounts be, set aside and the banks were directed to allow operations by the Petitioner forthwith.

Our Comments:

The ruling reinforces the legislative intent of Section 107 of  CGST Act, which seeks to balance revenue interest with taxpayer rights to appeal, by providing an automatic stay on coercive recoveries once appellate pre-deposit is made. The Delhi High Court’s approach is consistent with Arramva Corporation v. Addl. Director General(supra) by the Calcutta High Court clarifies on cross-jurisdictional attachment. Divergence from this principle would undermine the effect of appellate remedies and prejudice business activity.

Relevant Provisions:

Section 107(6), 107(7) of the CGST Act, 2017:

107. Appeals to Appellate Authority.-

(6) No appeal shall be filed under sub-section (1), unless the appellant has paid-

(a) in full, such part of the amount of tax, interest, fine, fee and penalty arising from the impugned order, as is admitted by him; and

(b) a sum equal to ten per cent. of the remaining amount of tax in dispute arising from the said order, subject to a maximum of twenty crore rupees, in relation to which the appeal has been filed.

Provided that in case of any order demanding penalty without involving demand of any tax, no appeal shall be filed against such order unless a sum equal to ten per cent. of the said penalty has been paid by the appellant.

(7) Where the appellant has paid the amount under sub-section (6), the recovery proceedings for the balance amount shall be deemed to be stayed.”

 (Author can be reached at [email protected])

answers
Sort by
+ Add A New Reply
Hide
+ Add A New Reply
Hide
Recent Articles