Case Law Details
Mutharamman & Co. Vs Principal Additional Director General (Madras High court)
Conclusion: The Hon’ble High Court observed while allowing the Writ observed that the power conferred upon an authority under Section 83 of the CGST Act, 2017 is substantial and with great power comes great responsibility.
Facts: The Petitioner in the present case has challenged attachment of Petitioner’s bank accounts in terms of Section 83 of CGST Act, based upon proceedings for search and seizure launched as against the Petitioner in terms of Section 67 of the Act.
The case of the petitioner is that the impugned attachment under Section 83 of the CGST Act is without any statutory sanction as it is consequent upon action under Section 67 of the Act, which deals with the power of the authorities to engage in inspection, search and seizure. The scope of Section 87 is wholly based upon the ‘opinion’ of the concerned Commissioner to the effect that the interests of the revenue were to be safeguarded and sanctioning coercive recovery proceedings of the nature of bank attachment in a particular case.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
