Court Invalidates Attachments & Credit Blocking, Orders Release. Clarifies Section 83 Inapplicability.

The Court found the provisional attachment of stock of goods and current account to be without legal authority as it was initiated under a section that did not empower such action. The impugned orders of attachment were quashed. Additionally, the blocking of input tax credit was deemed invalid due to the lack of statutory provision, leading to the immediate release of the blocked credit. The Court clarified that certain sections of the Act did not allow for the institution of proceedings, rendering the order of attachment under Section 83 invalid. Appeals against final assessment orders were directed to be decided by the Appellate Authority in accordance with the law.

---

---

Issues:
1. Validity of order of provisional attachment of stock of goods and current account
2. Blocking of input tax credit
3. Jurisdiction to pass order of attachment under Section 83 of the Act

Analysis:
1. The writ applicant sought relief against the order of provisional attachment of stock of goods and current account, challenging the authority of Respondent No. 2 to pass such orders. The Court noted that the power to invoke Section 83 of the Act for attachment is limited to specific proceedings under Sections 62, 63, 64, 67, 73, or 74 of the Act. As the proceedings were initiated under Section 71(1) of the Act, the Court found the attachment without legal authority. The Court quashed and set aside the impugned orders of attachment.

2. The respondents had also blocked the input tax credit of the petitioner, which was challenged on the grounds of lack of statutory provision empowering such action. The Court observed that there was no provision in the State Goods and Services Tax Act or Central Goods and Services Tax Act allowing the blocking of input tax credit by the respondents. Consequently, the Court directed the immediate release of the blocked credit available in the electronic credit ledger.

3. The Court clarified that Section 71 of the Act relates to access to business premises and does not provide for the institution of proceedings. Therefore, the Court held that there could be no proceedings initiated under Section 71 of the Act. As a result, the order of attachment under Section 83 of the Act was deemed invalid and was quashed. The Court further directed that any appeal against the final assessment order should be decided by the Appellate Authority in accordance with the law. The writ application was disposed of accordingly, with direct service permitted.

---