Provisional attachment under GST lapses after the statutory period, and cash credit facilities cannot be validly attached.

A provisional attachment under the GST framework ceases by operation of law once the statutory period under Section 83(2) expires, so continued restraint on operational bank accounts after that period is ineffective. The text also states that cash credit facilities are not amenable to provisional attachment, meaning any such restraint cannot survive. On that basis, the impugned attachments were treated as lapsed and the affected accounts were to be freed from restraint, allowing the petitioner to operate them.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the provisional attachment of the petitioner's bank accounts had ceased to operate on expiry of the statutory period under Section 83(2) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017; (ii) Whether cash credit facilities could be subjected to provisional attachment.

Issue (i): Whether the provisional attachment of the petitioner's bank accounts had ceased to operate on expiry of the statutory period under Section 83(2) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.

Analysis: The attachment was challenged as having been issued under the GST framework and having continued beyond the permissible statutory period. The respondents did not dispute that the one-year period contemplated by Section 83(2) had expired. On that basis, the Court held that by operation of law the attachment had ceased to have effect and the freezing of the petitioner's operational bank accounts had also lapsed.

Conclusion: The provisional attachment had lapsed and the petitioner's operational bank accounts were from the restraint.

Issue (ii): Whether cash credit facilities could be subjected to provisional attachment.

Analysis: The Court further noted the settled position that cash credit facilities are not amenable to provisional attachment. Applying that principle, it held that the restraint on the cash credit accounts could not survive.

Conclusion: Cash credit facilities could not be validly provisionally attached.

Final Conclusion: The petition succeeded to the extent that the impugned bank account attachments were held to have ceased and the petitioner was entitled to operate the affected accounts.

Ratio Decidendi: A provisional attachment under the GST law cannot continue beyond the statutory period prescribed by Section 83(2), and cash credit facilities are not susceptible to provisional attachment.

---