Case Law Details
Rayan Traders vs Principal Chief Commissioner of GST (Madras High court)
It is an admitted position in this case that there has been no order of assessment or any other order passed under the applicable provisions making a determination of the aforesaid amount as being ‘due’ from the petitioner. Neither has the petitioner been assessed under Sections 73 or 74, nor has there been any order passed reversing the Input Tax Credit that is claimed by the petitioner. In such circumstances, it is my considered view that the impugned notice has no legs to stand.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
The petitioner is an assessee under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (in short ‘Act’) and challenges attachment notice issued to the HDFC Bank, Korattur Branch dated 27.12.2019 in Form GST DRC-13. In terms of the aforesaid impugned notice, the bank has been directed to withhold the amount of upto a sum of Rs.74,52,943/- and pay the same forthwith to the Government.
2. This direction is premised upon the aforesaid sum becoming due from the petitioner in terms of the provisions of the CGST Act/TNGST Act, 2017. The Assessing Officer in the impugned notice refers to the petitioner as a defaulter and the relevant portion of the form of the impungned notice reads thus:
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
