MJ Bizcrafts LLP Vs Central Goods And Services Tax (Delhi High Court)
Delhi High Court held that formation of opinion on the basis of material is necessary for exercising power of provisional attachment under section 83(1) of the CGST Act. Provisional attachment justified as exercise of estimating value of GST conducted.
Facts- The petitioner has filed the present petition impugning the order passed by respondent no.1, whereby the order dated 10.05.2024 passed u/s. 83(1) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 provisionally attaching the petitioner’s four bank accounts maintained with the ICICI Bank, was upheld. The petitioner had filed an objection on 20.05.2024 to the provisional attachment order dated 10.05.2024 under Rule 159 (5) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 which was rejected by the impugned order.
Notably, the petitioner was operating a night club under the name ‘PRIVEE’ at Shangri-La, Eros Hotel, New Delhi. And, specific intelligence was received and developed which indicated that the petitioner was evading taxes. It is alleged that the petitioner was not disclosing the actual sale of liquor in its GST returns. Post investigation, according to the respondents, the primary GST liability as computed is approximately ₹4.7 Crores.
Thus, the competent officer came to the conclusion that it is necessary to secure the government revenue, pending conclusion of the proceedings. There was only ₹26,96,726/- in the petitioner’s bank account and therefore, the same was provisionally attached, in exercise of powers u/s. 83(1) of the CGST Act/DGST Act.
