Case Law Details
Vinodkumar Murlidhar Chechani Proprietor Of M/s. Chechani Trading Co. Vs State Of Gujarat (Gujarat High Court)
We have noticed over a period of time that in each and every matter in which proceedings under Section 67 of the Act are initiated, an order of provisional attachment of the bank accounts under Section 83 of the Act would follow. This mechanical exercise of the power is not appreciated. The Legislature has thought fit to confer upon the authority the power to provisionally attach the property of the assessee in the hope that such power is not exercised casually but, only after due and proper application of mind. A mechanical or casual exercise of such power will dilute the very efficacy of the provisions of Section 83 of the Act. Every day there are not less than ten matters on the subject of Section 83 of the Act in the cause-list. When there are plethora of judgments explaining Section 83 of the Act in details, then why so much of litigation in the High Court. The only reason that can be attributed is the mechanical exercise of power under Section 83 of the Act. This should stop at the earliest. So much judicial time is wasted in all such matters wherein the law is so well settled.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF GUJARAT HIGH COURT
1. By this writ-application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the writ-applicant has prayed for the following reliefs :
“(a) quash and set-aside the impugned orders dated 28.8.2020 (inadvertently mentioned as 28.8.2018) at Annexure-A (Colly) provisionally attaching the CC/Current Bank Account No.066028304000013 held with the AMCO Bank, Current Bank Account No.02372320002872 and Savings Bank Account No.02371000038487 held by the Petitioner with the HDFC Bank Limited;
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
