TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (3) TMI 577
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rd to the services rendered. 2. On 22.02.2018, there was a search initiated by the 2nd respondent i.e. the Intelligence Officers under the provisions of the Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 (GST Act). On the basis of materials collected, the Intelligence Department levelled allegations to the effect that Service Tax as well as Goods and Service Tax (ST & GST) had been collected from the recipient companies, but had not been remitted to the Department. That is, though the petitioner is registered under the Finance Act, 1994 as well as the GST Act, 2017 and returns have been filed under the aforesaid two enactments, the petitioner did not, and this is admitted, remit the amounts of ST and GST collected by it from the service recipients. 3. A....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....enue, point out that there is nothing to be gained by virtue of the impugned provisional attachment since the attachment only stands in the way of the petitioner carrying on business and making efforts to settle the arrears due. Quite apart from the fact that there are manifold difficulties being faced by businesses on account of the pandemic, the petitioner has, he says, been making and is continuing to make, an earnest attempt to repay the dues to the revenue. 6. Per contra, Mr.V.Sundareswaran would state that in light of the admitted arrears, the department has no other option, but to recover the arrears by any means at its disposal. 7. Having regard to the rival contentions that have been advanced, I am of the view that the petitioner....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n virtual currency/cryptocurrency. The Bench considers the test of proportionality as enunciated in the case of Modern Dental College and Research Centre v. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors. (2016 7 SCC 353), to the effect that the remedy must not be worse than the evil that it seeks to protect from. By attaching the bank account and preventing fruitful productivity, nobody stands to gain. Thus, it is in the best interest of both parties to permit the petitioner to continue in business operations subject to the caveats laid by me above and any further that the revenue may choose to impose. 10. In the case of Nokia India Private Limited v. Additional Commissioner of Income Tax and others (2015 13 Supreme Court Cases 729), an order under Sectio....