Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Patran Steel Rolling Mill Vs Assistant Commissioner of State Tax (Gujarat High Court)
Appeal Number : Special Civil Application No. 16931 of 2018
Date of Judgement/Order : 20/12/2018
Related Assessment Year :
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sponsored

Patran Steel Rolling Mill Vs Assistant Commissioner of State Tax (Gujarat High Court)

Satisfaction to be Recorded before passing order of attachment of Assets under GST

Facts- The Assessee company is engaged in manufacturing & supplying TMT bars and paid GST on the same. The Revenue visited the Assessee’s factory & compared stock of raw material & finished goods with recorded quantity of the same. Investigation at the end of the transporters revealed that the Assessee supplied & received goods without payment of tax. The Assessee was also compelled to give postdated cheques towards payment. Later the Revenue passed an order of attachment against the stock found to be in excess. Several bank accounts operated by the Assessee & its executives were also attached -The Assessee claimed that the attachment of the bank accounts had crippled the day-to-day activities of the Assessee & was impeding upon its ability to pay taxes . Hence the present writ.

The Hon’ble High Court held that As per mandate of Section 83(1) of the GGST Act, the Commr. must record written reasons before attaching any property or bank accounts or taking any such drastic action. Besides, the Commr. must record satisfaction that such action was justified so as to protect the Revenue’s interests. In the present case, the Commr. recorded no such satisfaction. Hence no opinion could be formed to validate the provisional attachment of property. Hence the attachment order is unsustainable. Besides, the sum already deposited by the Assessee need not be construed as admission of dues on its part. Before exercising powers u/s 83 of the GGST Act, the Revenue must balance the interest of the Revenue with those of the assessee, so as to ensure that while the Revenue’s interests are safeguarded, the functioning of the Assessee does not get crippled. Drastic action u/s 83 of the Act is justified if the assessee is a fly-by-night operator or habitual offender, which is not the case here. Powers under this provision must be exercised after due application of mind. Hence the attachment of the bank accounts is directed to be lifted.

FULL TEXT OF THE HIGH COURT ORDER / JUDGMENT

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.

Sponsored

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Sponsored
Sponsored
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
August 2024
M T W T F S S
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031