Blog

It is directed that the Respondent should defreeze the bank accounts of the Petitioners and was upheld by the High Court Of Delhi through the learned bench led by HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN and HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR KUMAR JAIN in the case of ANUJ GOEL (PROPRIETOR OF M/S GOEL TRADING COMPANY) vs THE COMMISSIONER CGST DELHI EAST COMMISSIONERATE & ANR. (W.P.(C) 3696/2022 & C.M.No.10967/2022) on 08th March, 2022.

Brief facts of the case are that the present writ petitions have been filed to release/de-freeze the bank accounts of the Petitioners that had been provisionally attached by the Respondents vide orders dated 10th September, 2020 and 11th September, 2020. On the last date of hearing, learned counsel for the Respondents had sought time to obtain instructions

Learned counsel for the Respondent contends  that no fresh DRC-22 notices have been issued against the Petitioners. He also clarified that the State GST has issued notices under Section 74 of the Delhi GST Act to the Petitioners. After issuance of the impugned orders/letters, no fresh attachment order has been issued to the Petitioners. According to Section 83(2) of the CGST Act, every provisional attachment order ceases to have effect after the expiry of one year from the date the order was passed under Section 83(1) of the CGST Act. Consequently, the impugned provisional attachment order/letter is no longer effective

The Court directs the Respondents to defreeze the bank accounts of the Petitioners not later than three days from today. With the aforesaid directions, the present writ petitions along with pending applications stand disposed of.

Click here to read the Judgment

Judgment reviewed by – Amit Singh