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 recovery notice attaching the petitioner's bank account in GST proceedings should be vacated, having regard to the supplier-related dispute and the petitioner's reversal of Input Tax Credit.
Analysis: The petitioner had received the supplies and had already reversed the Input Tax Credit availed on the invoices in question. The proceedings against the supplier and the possibility of collateral recovery action created uncertainty about the ultimate liability. Balancing the interests of the petitioner and the supplier, the Court found it appropriate to remove the immediate attachment, while safeguarding against any direct or indirect payment to the supplier pending resolution of the collateral dispute in appropriate proceedings.
Conclusion: The bank account attachment was ordered to be vacated, subject to protection against payment to the supplier until appropriate orders are obtained in collateral proceedings.
Final Conclusion: The writ petition was allowed only to the extent of relief against the bank account attachment, with protective conditions preserving the respondent's and supplier's rights in pending or future proceedings.
Ratio Decidendi: Where the assessee has reversed the disputed Input Tax Credit and the underlying liability is entangled in parallel collateral proceedings, immediate recovery by bank attachment may be lifted on equitable terms to protect all stakeholders.