https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=409588 The Court addressed the challenge to the attachment of a bank account by the Additional Director General in proceedings under Section 67 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The petitioner's argument on the jurisdiction of attachment, non-utilization of Rule 159(5) of the Central GST Rules, and the effectiveness of the remedy provided by the rule were considered. The Court emphasized the importance of factual examination before releasing the property from attachment and granted the petitioner time to approach the Additional Director General under Rule 159(5). The Court left the merits of rival claims open for future consideration. en-us Thu, 08 Jul 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 26 Mar 2025 11:23:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=409588 The Court addressed the challenge to the attachment of a bank account by the Additional Director General in proceedings under Section 67 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The petitioner's argument on the jurisdiction of attachment, non-utilization of Rule 159(5) of the Central GST Rules, and the effectiveness of the remedy provided by the rule were considered. The Court emphasized the importance of factual examination before releasing the property from attachment and granted the petitioner time to approach the Additional Director General under Rule 159(5). The Court left the merits of rival claims open for future consideration. Case-Laws GST Thu, 08 Jul 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=409588