https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=419144 The HC allowed writ applications challenging provisional attachment of bank accounts under CGST Act, 2017, finding that taxpayers had paid an excess amount compared to input tax credit availed, resulting in no revenue loss. The Court quashed the attachment orders but clarified that tax payment did not necessarily absolve the opponents of potential liability for wrongful input tax credit availment. The Revenue was permitted to issue show cause notices and determine final liability through proper adjudication processes, with opponents retaining the right to respond to such notices according to law. en-us Wed, 02 Feb 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 02 Apr 2025 12:10:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=419144 The HC allowed writ applications challenging provisional attachment of bank accounts under CGST Act, 2017, finding that taxpayers had paid an excess amount compared to input tax credit availed, resulting in no revenue loss. The Court quashed the attachment orders but clarified that tax payment did not necessarily absolve the opponents of potential liability for wrongful input tax credit availment. The Revenue was permitted to issue show cause notices and determine final liability through proper adjudication processes, with opponents retaining the right to respond to such notices according to law. Case-Laws GST Wed, 02 Feb 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=419144