JSK Sons Vs State of Gujarat (Gujarat High Court)
The issue under consideration is whether the order for provisional attachment of bank accounts against bogus billing and fake generation of E-Way bills without the actual physical movement of goods is justified in law?
the Courts have repeatedly emphasized that such power of provisional attachment is not to be routinely exercised under the pretext to safeguard the Government revenue and it is not an omnibus power. However, in the facts of the case it has prima facie emerged from the material on the record that the petitioners were involved in bogus billing to defraud the Revenue by generating EWay bills without physical movement of the goods. Therefore, the power exercised by the respondent authorities cannot be said to be without jurisdiction. As prima facie it appears from the record that the petitioners were involved in the activity of bogus billing and generation of EWay bill without physical movement of the goods, it cannot be said that the impugned orders passed for provisional attachment are used as tool to harass the petitioners or it would have irreversible detrimental effect on the business of the petitioners. In the facts of the case, prima facie it appears that the petitioners have misused the provisions of the GGST Act by generating EWay bills so as to claim input tax credit by indulging in bogus billing without physical movement of the goods from remote villages in Jamnagar district. In view of the foregoing reasons no interference is required to be made in exercise of powers under section 83 of the GGST Act by the respondent authorities while exercising extraordinary powers under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India. The petition therefore, being devoid of any merit, is summarily dismissed.
FULL TEXT OF THE HIGH COURT ORDER /JUDGEMENT
By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have prayed for the following reliefs :
“(A) Your Lordship may be pleased to admit this petition:
(B) Your Lordship may be pleased issue a writ of mandamus or any other appointment writ, order and/or directions in the nature of mandamus, quashing and setting aside the provisional order of attachment said to have been issued by Respondent No.2 for attaching the Bank Accounts, as per the Table mentioned herein above at para 2C, of the Petitioners maintained with the Respondent No.4 to 6 Banks, in the interest of justice;
(C) Pending admission hearing and till final disposal of the present petition, Your Lordship may be pleased to suspend operation, execution and implementation of the order of provisional attachment said to have been issued by Respondent No.2 for attachment of above mentioned Bank Accounts of the Petitioners maintained with Respondent No. 4 to 6 to permit the Petitioners to operate the said Accounts, in the interest of justice:
(D) Your Lordship may be pleased to pass such other and/or further orders as may be deemed fit, just and proper in the interest of justice.”
2. It is the case of the petitioners that the bank accounts of the petitioners have been provisionally attached under section 83 of the Gujarat Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 (for short “GGST Act”) without considering the provisions of section 83 of the GGST Act, as in the case of the petitioners no proceedings are pending under any of the sections mentioned therein.
3. Brief facts of the case are as under :
3.1) Petitioner no.2 is a proprietor of petitioner no.1 firm. It is the case of the petitioners that respondents no. 1 to 3 have attached the following bank accounts of the petitioners maintained with respondents no. 4 to 6 banks without intimating the petitioners about their action of attaching such bank accounts of the petitioners :
