Delhi High Court ordered and directed the GST Department to treat the writ filed by petitioner as an objection under Rule 159(5) of CGST Rules and decide the same within three working days.

WATERMELON MANAGEMENT SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED vs. THE COMMISSIONER, CENTRAL TAX, GST DELHI (EAST) & ANR.

Present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the provisional attachment order dated 05th March, 2020 issued by respondent to the petitioner’s bankers.

Learned counsel for petitioner states that in the absence of any notice issued under Section 74 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as ‘Act, 2017’), no order of attachment under Section 83 of the Act, 2017 could have been passed by the respondents. Issue notice.

Held by High Court:

Having heard the learned counsel for parties, this Court is of the view that Rule 159(5) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 is squarely applicable to the facts of the present case. The Rule 159(5) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 reads as under:-

“159. Provisional attachment of property.-

xxx xxx xxx

(5) Any person whose property is attached may, within seven days of the attachment under sub-rule (1), file an objection to the effect that the property attached was or is not liable to attachment, and the Commissioner may, after affording an opportunity of being heard to the person filing the objection, release the said property by an order in FORM GST DRC-23.”

Keeping in view the similarity of circumstances as obtained in the above case, we deem it appropriate to direct the respondent No.1 to treat the present writ petition as an objection under Rule 159(5) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 and decide the same within three working days.

With the aforesaid direction, present writ petition stands disposed of.

taxreply.com © 2024. All Rights Reserved