2025 (9) TMI 48

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ertiorari quashing the impugned order dated 01.05.2025 (Annexure-1) passed by respondent no. 2, to the extent the same relates to the petitioner, attaching the bank account no. 325401001796 of the petitioner maintained with the ICICI Bank, Ghaziabad-201016 for the fourth consecutive year; B-Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus, directing the respondents to forthwith allow the operation of bank account bearing No. 325401001796, Account holder Name- Lalita, ICICI Bank situated at 4, Part A, Gaur Global Village, Crossing Republic, Ghaziabad-201 009;" 3. In the present case, the provisional attachment under Section 83 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as the "Act") has been made fo....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ers by the respondent under challenge before the Gujarat High Court appears to be indefensible as rightly contended by Mr. Dave. 30. That apart, having regard to the draconian nature of power conferred on the revenue by sub-section (1) of Section 83 of the CGST Act to levy a provisional attachment, the terms of the entire section have to be construed in a manner so that sub-section (2) of Section 83 is not effectively reduced to a dead letter. We are reminded of the maxim utres magis valeat quam pereat. It is an interpretive doctrine that a legal text, specially a statute, should be interpreted in a way that gives the document force rather than makes it fail. Conceding power to the revenue to issue a fresh provisional order of attachment ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... old wine in a new bottle. 32. Besides, a reading of the statute in its entirety would reveal that the provisional attachment is a pre-emptive measure to protect the interests of government revenue. It cannot function as a recovery measure; for that, the statue has other provisions. Certainly, a period of one year, as ordained by the legislature, is enough for the revenue authorities to conclude its investigation; if not, the legislature could have provided for a renewal or an extended period as in the Excise Act and the Customs Act. Sub-section (2) of Section 83 does not provide for any exception to the rule. Any explanation given by the respondent for issuing a renewal would be in the teeth of the established procedure. Once the inquiry....