TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Court Orders Partial Unfreezing of Accounts Pending Hearing</h1> The Court directed the respondents to unfreeze specific accounts while continuing the attachment of others. As an interim measure, the Court ordered the ... Provisional attachment of bank accounts - Section 83 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 - HELD THAT:- Since as per the provisional attachment dated 9th November, 2020, claim of the respondents is to the tune of ₹ 6,83,85,272.00, we are of the view that without entering into other aspects of the matter at this stage, it would meet the ends of justice, if the savings account Nos.8611761716 and 6011787626 having deposits of ₹ 2,04,404.00 and ₹ 5,07,642.71 respectively are unfrozen while the other accounts remain frozen. This we feel will balance the interest of both the sides for the moment. The respondents are directed to unfreeze the other accounts of the petitioner lying with the Kotak Mahindra Bank except current account No.2511818181 which shall remain frozen till the next date - Stand over to 17th December, 2020. Issues: Challenge to provisional attachment of bank accounts under Section 83 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.Analysis:1. The petitioner challenged the provisional attachment of bank accounts under Section 83 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The Assistant Commissioner issued a letter on 9th November, 2020, stating an amount of Rs. 6,83,85,272.00 may be recoverable from the petitioner.2. The petitioner's counsel argued that no adjudication of dues had taken place, and the conditions stipulated under Section 83 had not been complied with. The counsel highlighted that no enquiry had been initiated against the petitioner but against another company. Additionally, the attachment was made by the Assistant Commissioner instead of the Commissioner as required by law.3. The petitioner pointed out that the provisional attachment had frozen all accounts of the petitioner, totaling Rs. 1,97,28,403.00, severely impacting business operations. The frozen accounts included various types such as Current Account, Fixed Deposits, and Savings Account in Kotak Mahindra Bank.4. The Court directed the respondents to unfreeze specific accounts while continuing the attachment of others. As an interim measure, the Court ordered the unfreezing of the current account and saving account of the petitioner, maintaining the freeze on other accounts until the next hearing scheduled for 17th December 2020.5. The Court's decision aimed to balance the interests of both parties temporarily. The order was to be digitally signed and forwarded to the petitioner by email for compliance. All concerned parties were instructed to act upon the digitally signed copy of the order.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
