TMI Blog2020 (2) TMI 1106X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rly attracted to the present case. Moreover, it is the objector who would suffer adverse consequence on account of delay on his part in raising the objections. The respondents do not suffer any adverse consequence on account of delay, if any, in moving the objections, thus, the period of 7 days prescribed in Rule 159(5) of the CGST Rules for moving the objections to the provisional attachment is merely directory and not mandatory. Objections raised by the petitioner, therefore, could not be rejected on that ground alone. The proceedings are remanded back to the concerned authority for passing a fresh order on the merits of the objections - petition allowed by way of remand. - W.P.(C) 1597/2020 - - - Dated:- 17-2-2020 - MR. VIPIN SANG ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt petition. The petitioner states that bank accounts have been attached under Section 83 of the Act, particulars whereof are as follows:- S. No. Order C.No. Balance as on Account Number Bank Cr. Balance 1 267/INT/DGGI/HQ/2019/8499 31.12.19 378501010034789 Union Bank of India 4.94,76,201.30 2 267/INT/DGGI/HQ/2019/8500 11.2.20 5020008548874 HDFC Bank 86,51,284.80 3 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ts, the petitioner relied upon the decision of the Supreme Court in Sambha Ji Vs. Gangabai, 2009 (240) ELT 161 (SC) = 2008 (11) TMI 393 - SUPREME COURT . In the said case, the Court construed Order 8 Rule 1 CPC to be a directory provision, notwithstanding that it requires the defendant to present the written statement of his defence within 30 days from the date of service of summons upon him. Order 8 Rule 1 CPC reads as follows: - 1. Written statement The defendant shall, within thirty days from the date of service of summons on him, present a written statement of his defence. Provided that where the defendant fails to file the written statement within the said period of thirty days, he shall be allowed to file the same ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... so the serious inconvenience of the court faced with frequent prayers for adjournments. The object is to expedite the hearing and not to scuttle the same. While justice delayed may amount to justice denied, justice hurried may in some cases amount to justice buried. x x x x 13. it is also to be noted that though the power of the court under the proviso appended to Rule 1 of Order 8 is circumscribed by the words shall not be later than ninety day but the consequences flowing from non-extension of time are not specifically provided for though they may be read by necessary implication. Merely, because a provision of law is couched in a negative language implying mandatory character, the same is not without exceptions. The courts, w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... consequence is prescribed either in the Act or in the Rules to say that if the objections are not preferred within 7 days, they shall not be entertained. 10. The decision in Sambhaji (2008 (11) TMI 393 - SUPREME COURT) is clearly attracted to the present case. Moreover, it is the objector who would suffer adverse consequence on account of delay on his part in raising the objections. The respondents do not suffer any adverse consequence on account of delay, if any, in moving the objections. We, therefore, hold that the period of 7 days prescribed in Rule 159(5) of the CGST Rules for moving the objections to the provisional attachment is merely directory and not mandatory. Objections raised by the petitioner, therefore, could not be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
