Delhi HC allows petitioner to apply for lifting provisional attachment under Section 83 CGST Act within one week

Delhi HC disposed of writ petition challenging provisional attachment of bank account under Section 83 of CGST Act, 2017 for alleged wrongful Input Tax Credit availment. Court granted petitioner liberty to apply for lifting provisional attachment under Rule 159 within one week. HC directed that any revocation application be examined and disposed of within two weeks in accordance with law, considering the nature of allegations in the impugned order.

---

---

Issues:
1. Challenge to the provisional attachment of bank account under Section 83 of the CGST Act.
2. Compliance with Rule 159 of the CGST Rules regarding objections and revocation of provisional attachment.

Analysis:

Issue 1: Challenge to Provisional Attachment
The writ petitioner challenged the provisional attachment of its bank account under Section 83 of the CGST Act. The petitioner argued that the order lacked justification and failed to demonstrate that the attachment was necessary to protect government revenue. Reference was made to the Supreme Court's principles emphasizing the need for sufficient material to justify such drastic actions. The court noted the allegations of suspicious payments and fraudulent ITC availing but highlighted the petitioner's right to object and seek revocation under Rule 159 of the CGST Rules.

Issue 2: Compliance with Rule 159 of the CGST Rules
Rule 159 of the CGST Rules provides a mechanism for filing objections and seeking revocation of a provisional attachment. The court acknowledged the petitioner's right to challenge the attachment and directed the petitioner to move for lifting the attachment within a week as per Rule 159. The court emphasized that any application for revocation should be examined and disposed of promptly, preferably within two weeks. Importantly, the court kept all rights and contentions of the parties open, indicating that the final decision on the matter was pending further proceedings in compliance with the law.

In conclusion, the High Court allowed the petitioner to seek revocation of the provisional attachment under Rule 159 of the CGST Rules. The judgment emphasized the importance of following due process and providing the petitioner with an opportunity to challenge the attachment. The court's decision ensured that the petitioner's rights were protected while maintaining the integrity of the legal procedures outlined in the CGST Act and Rules.

---