Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the provisional attachment of the petitioner's bank account under Section 83 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 had ceased to have effect after the expiry of one year, and whether the impugned attachment order was liable to be quashed with consequential release of the bank account.
Analysis: The Court held that an order of provisional attachment made under Section 83(1) ceases to have effect after one year by operation of Section 83(2). As the impugned order dated 22 March 2024 had already crossed the one-year period, it no longer survived in law. In view of the clear statutory consequence, the Court found no need to defer the matter pending further instructions and treated the attachment as spent.
Conclusion: The provisional attachment order had ceased to have effect after one year and was formally quashed and set aside, with a direction to release the petitioner's bank account.
Ratio Decidendi: A provisional attachment under Section 83(1) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 automatically lapses upon expiry of one year under Section 83(2), and an order surviving beyond that period cannot continue to operate.