Case Law Details
Union of India Vs Anandbhavan Properties (Karnataka High Court)
It is trite that when the Act specifically provides the requirements for invoking Section 83, it has to be strictly adhered to. Merely referring to the letter which indeed does not refer to section 74, it cannot be presumed that such proceedings under Section 74 of the Act were pending to initiate proceedings under Section 83 of the Act. Inference that could be drawn from the material available on record cannot be stretched to consider any letter issued requesting the assessee to pay the bills to be the compliance of Section 83 of the Act. In other words, compliance of the necessary ingredients/conditions is sine qua non and it has to be done in letter and spirit not in a cryptic and cavalier manner.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
This intra Court appeal is directed against the order dated 26.09.2019 passed in W.P.No.21494/2019 whereby the writ petition filed by the respondent herein has been allowed setting aside the Annexures-D and E dated 27.08.2018 and 17.10.2018 respectively issued by the office of the Commissioner of Central Tax.
2. The appellants having invoked Section 83 of the Central and Service Tax Act, 2017 [‘Act’ for shot] by issuing provisional attachment notice dated 30.03.2019 [Annexure-L to the writ petition], the respondent – assessee has preferred writ petition contending that the ingredients stated under Section 83 would not attract. The learned Single Judge having examined the proceedings initiated under Section 83 of the Act vis-à-vis the provisions of Section 83 has come to the conclusion that none of the requirements contemplated under Section 83[1] of the Act being satisfactorily found, allowed the writ petition. Hence, this writ petition by the Revenue.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
