SHRI ADABALA NARYANA v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS – RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
High Court, Rajasthan
Manindra Mohan Shrivastava, Chief Justice & Ashutosh Kumar, Justice
SHRI ADABALA NARYANA
v.
UNION OF INDIA & ORS
D. B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION No. 13552/2024 dated 02.09.2024
Law : GST
Act Name : Central Goods & Services Tax Act, 2017
Relevant Section : Section 83
Rule Number : Rule 159
Rule Name : Central Goods & Services Tax Rules, 2017
Decision : Matter remanded back
Provisional Attachment of Bank Account – No Specific time limit for deciding objections filed u/r 159 – Objections must be resolved within a reasonable timeframe – Section 83 read with Rule 159 – Respondent authority provisionally attached the petitioner’s bank account via an order in FORM-GST DRC-22 – Petitioner was informed of this attachment through the bank, without receiving direct communication of the order from the authorities – It was argued that while the objection was submitted in a timely manner, it has remained undecided, and leaving it pending indefinitely violates the spirit of the law. The petitioner seeks a resolution within a reasonable time – Held that – The court acknowledged that under Rule 159(5), any person whose property is attached may file an objection to the attachment, and the Commissioner may release the property after considering the objection, issuing an order in FORM-GST DRC-23 – However, the Rule does not specify a time limit for deciding such objections. The court emphasized that objections must be resolved within a reasonable timeframe, as prolonged delays would defeat the purpose of allowing objections to provisional attachments – Noted that two months had already passed since the petitioner submitted the objection and stated that, in the absence of an express provision, objections should ideally be decided within an outer limit of three months from the date of submission – Directed respondent authority to resolve the petitioner’s objection by affording an opportunity of being heard – Also, suggested that the respondents issue an appropriate circular (if not already in place) prescribing a time limit for deciding objections to prevent the rule from becoming a mere formality. This is particularly important as Section 83 of the CGST Act limits the maximum duration of a provisional attachment to one year.
Represented By:
Counsel for the Petitioner: Sankalp Todi Advocate
Continue Reading...
This is only a preview of the article. The complete article contains detailed analysis, examples, notifications, circulars, case laws, interpretations and practical guidance available to premium members.
This is only a preview of the article. The complete article contains detailed analysis, examples, notifications, circulars, case laws, interpretations and practical guidance available to premium members.
🔒 Premium Content
Subscribe to access complete articles, notifications, circulars, case laws, downloads, videos and premium resources.
Become Premium Member