2019 (12) TMI 779

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... AND CUSTOMS JUDGMENT Abdul Rehim, J.: W.A. No.2359/2019 is filed against an interim order of the Single Judge, dated 19th November, 2019, passed in W.P.(C) No.31184/2019. After hearing both sides for quite some time, we felt that the writ petition itself can be disposed of based on the contentions raised. Therefore W.P.(C) No.31184/2019 is tagged on to the writ appeal and both the cases are disposed of through this common judgment. 2. Issue pertains to the sustainability of a proceedings initiated for recovery of the amount of interest due under Section 50 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 ('CGST Act' for short) and the consequential garnishee proceedings initiated under Section 79 (1) (c) of the said Act.....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....without taking into consideration of the credit due is unsustainable, is the argument. The appellant/petitioner had also pointed out the amendments brought into Section 50 of the Act which reads as follows; "Provided that the interest on tax payable in respect of supplies made during a tax period and declared in the return for the said period furnished after the due date in accordance with the provisions of sec.39 except were such return is furnished after commencement of any proceedings u/s 73 or sec. 74 in respect of the said period, shall be levied on that portion of tax that is paid by debiting the electronic cash ledger." 4. Despite filing of the objections as mentioned above, the 3rd respondent had issued Ext.P20 notice to....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the 3rd respondent for consideration of Ext.P18 and P19, before proceeding with the coercive steps, would suffice to meet the ends of justice. 7. Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents 1 to 3 had pointed out that, if no restrainment is imposed with respect to operation of the Bank Account held by the petitioner with the 4th respondent, pending disposal of such consideration, it may cause prejudice to the public exchequer. We find force in the said contention. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant/petitioner made an offer to furnish Bank Guarantee for the entire amount demanded under Ext.P20, pending finalization of the matter by the 3rd respondent. 8. Under the above mentioned circumstances, both the writ appeal ....