Dispute over service delays attachment order challenge. Petitioner allowed to file appeal within four weeks. Seek interim relief.

The challenge to the attachment order was based on delayed service of the assessment order. The petitioner claimed the assessment order was received late via post, while the Government Advocate argued it was sent via email on the same day. Despite the dispute over the mode of service, the petitioner was allowed to file a statutory appeal within four weeks. The court suggested seeking interim relief from the first appellate authority regarding the bank account attachment, subject to providing necessary information for consideration. The Writ Petition was disposed of without costs.

---

---

Issues:
Challenge to order of attachment dated 10.03.2021 based on delayed service of assessment order dated 17.02.2020.

Analysis:
The petitioner contested the attachment order citing delayed receipt of the assessment order served via post on 30.03.2021. In contrast, the Government Advocate asserted that the order was sent via email on the same day, including both the speaking order and summary. The mode of service was crucial as per Section 169 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, which allows service through various methods, including email. Despite the dispute over the mode of service, the petitioner expressed intent to file a statutory appeal against the assessment order within four weeks, relying on Supreme Court decisions extending the limitation period for appeals.

Interim Relief:
The petitioner sought interim relief to lift the bank account attachment pending appeal, but the court couldn't consider it due to lack of information on the available balance. The court suggested approaching the first appellate authority for interim protection by submitting the necessary details for consideration in accordance with the law.

Conclusion:
The Writ Petition was disposed of with no costs, allowing the petitioner to file a statutory appeal within four weeks without limitation constraints. The court advised on seeking interim relief through the first appellate authority concerning the bank account attachment, contingent on providing the required information for a decision in compliance with legal procedures.

---