J L Enterprises Vs Assistant Commissioner (Calcutta High Court)
The Calcutta High Court addressed a writ petition filed by JL Enterprises, challenging a provisional order of attachment issued by the Assistant Commissioner of State Tax under Section 83 of the WBGST/CGST Act, 2017. The petitioner’s advocate argued that Section 83 empowers authorities to attach property, including bank accounts, if deemed necessary to protect government revenue, but only after proceedings under specific chapters of the Act have commenced.
The court noted that, as per Section 83(2), a provisional attachment ordinarily expires one year from the date of the order. Given that the attachment order was issued on April 13, 2023, the court reasoned that it had effectively expired. The petitioner further argued that the attachment order should not continue since the proceedings under Section 74, which prompted the attachment, had concluded with a final demand order in Form DRC 07 dated June 6, 2023. Additionally, the petitioner had appealed this final order under Section 107, having made the required pre-deposit. The petitioner contended that once this pre-deposit is made and the appeal is in order, the demand in Form DRC 07 cannot be enforced, thus rendering the attachment order unsustainable.
The Calcutta High Court, after hearing both sides, agreed that the provisional attachment under Section 83(1), dated April 13, 2023, had expired due to the passage of time. The court clarified that this ruling does not prevent the respondents from initiating new proceedings or enforcing the demand through lawful means based on a separate cause of action. The court disposed of the writ petition with these observations and directions, without imposing any costs.
