https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=411303 The High Court ruled in favor of the petitioner in a challenge against a bank's decision to restrict their account based on an expired attachment order under Section 83 of the CGST Act, 2017. The Court held that the attachment order had lost its legal effect as it exceeded the maximum duration allowed. The bank was directed not to take any further action based on the expired order. The writ petition, WPA No.10012 of 2021, was disposed of with these observations, noting that the allegations by the petitioner were considered denied by the respondents. en-us Wed, 11 Aug 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 26 Mar 2025 13:14:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=411303 The High Court ruled in favor of the petitioner in a challenge against a bank's decision to restrict their account based on an expired attachment order under Section 83 of the CGST Act, 2017. The Court held that the attachment order had lost its legal effect as it exceeded the maximum duration allowed. The bank was directed not to take any further action based on the expired order. The writ petition, WPA No.10012 of 2021, was disposed of with these observations, noting that the allegations by the petitioner were considered denied by the respondents. Case-Laws GST Wed, 11 Aug 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=411303