High Court Directs Timely Decision on CGST Relief Petition

The High Court of Madras, with Mr. Justice M. Sundar presiding, directed the first respondent to promptly evaluate and decide on the petitioner's representation seeking relief from attachment under the Central Goods and Services Act, 2017. The court ordered the first respondent to dispose of the representation within six weeks and communicate the decision to the petitioner within seven working days thereafter. The writ petition was disposed of with these directions, emphasizing the importance of timely action by the first respondent in addressing the petitioner's concerns under the CGST Act.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Representation seeking relief from attachment under Central Goods and Services Act, 2017 not responded to by the first respondent.

Analysis:
The judgment delivered by the High Court of Madras, with Mr. Justice M. Sundar presiding, pertained to a writ petition where the petitioner sought relief from the attachment of their Savings Bank account under the Central Goods and Services Act, 2017 (CGST Act), along with other proceedings including criminal prosecution. The petitioner had submitted a representation to the first respondent requesting the removal of the attachment, which went unanswered, leading to the filing of the writ petition. The counsel for the petitioner abridged the prayer to seek a direction for the disposal of the said representation. With the consent of both parties, the main writ petition was heard and disposed of, focusing on the limited scope of the case.

The court noted that the writ petition had been narrowed down significantly, making it unnecessary to delve into detailed facts. The essential point was the failure of the first respondent to respond to the petitioner's representation dated 06.05.2019, which was received on 08.05.2019. The court, considering the restricted scope of the petition, issued a direction to the first respondent to evaluate and decide on the petitioner's representation promptly and in accordance with the law. The first respondent was instructed to dispose of the representation within six weeks from the date of receiving a copy of the court's order, with communication of the decision to the petitioner within seven working days thereafter.

In conclusion, the High Court of Madras disposed of the writ petition with the aforementioned directions, emphasizing the need for expeditious action by the first respondent in addressing the petitioner's representation under the CGST Act. No costs were awarded in this judgment.

---