Tax Authorities Ordered to Review Blocked Funds and Reconsider Petitioner's Grievances Within Four Weeks

HC issued a mandamus directing tax authorities to review blocked funds after petitioner's representation. The court mandated second respondent to consider petitioner's grievances within four weeks, ensuring due process. Funds in other bank accounts were protected from attachment pending resolution. The judgment emphasized fair administrative action and procedural compliance in tax-related fund blockages.

---

---

Issues:
Mandamus for release of blocked funds in petitioner's bank account without due process of law.

Analysis:
The writ petition sought a Mandamus directing the second respondent to release blocked funds in the petitioner's bank account and refrain from blocking funds without following due process. The petitioner faced issues due to technical glitches in the GST Portal while filing GSTR-3B for July 2017, resulting in discrepancies in ITC availed. Summonses and notices were issued by the first and second respondents regarding alleged tax shortfalls and non-payment for transactions in July 2017. Despite attending enquiries and providing details, the petitioner's funds in the bank account were blocked without receiving a copy of the notice explaining the block. The petitioner's representation to release the blocked funds was not addressed adequately, leading to the writ petition.

The petitioner's counsel highlighted the potential adverse impact on the petitioner's business if the funds remained blocked. The Court noted that the petitioner had not specifically requested the release of blocked funds in the bank account with the fourth respondent. It directed the petitioner to submit a fresh representation to the second respondent articulating their grievances within a week. The Court emphasized that the representation should be considered on merits and in accordance with the law, ensuring no prejudice to the respondents. The second respondent was instructed to make a final decision on the representation within four weeks, taking into account the petitioner's submissions.

In conclusion, the Court disposed of the writ petition with the direction for the petitioner to submit a fresh representation regarding the blocked funds. Until a decision was made on the representation, the respondents were prohibited from attaching funds in any other bank account related to the subject demand. The judgment aimed to address the petitioner's concerns regarding the blocked funds and ensure a fair and lawful resolution within a specified timeframe.

---