TMI Blog2021 (8) TMI 618X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ced hereinabove, and the same was dismissed on merits, as is evident from the observations made therein, and also considering the fact that the subsequent order of provisional attachment dated 25.02.2021 was available with the petitioner during the pendency of the proceedings before this Court as also before the Supreme Court of India, as it had been annexed with the counter affidavit of the opposite parties in Writ Petition No. 5804 (MB) of 2021, the burden is heavy upon the petitioner's counsel to explain as to how this petition is maintainable against the order dated 25.02.2021; firstly on account of dismissal of its writ petition against the similar order of provisional attachment by the Supreme Court of India on 01.07.2021, which i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... i Pranjal Krishna, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Digvijay Nath Dubey, learned counsel for opposite party Nos. 2 to 5, Sri Prashant Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for opposite party No.6 and Ms. Veena Raje, learned counsel for Union of India. The petitioner has challenged herein the order dated 03.02.2021 passed by Deputy Director, Agra Regional Unit (Directorate General of GST Intelligence, Agra Regional Unit), freezing account of the petitioner in exercise of power under Section 83 of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017. The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that Deputy Director not being of the rank of Commissioner did not have jurisdiction to pass such an order or issue such communication. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed. During the pendency of the aforesaid writ petition the petitioner filed a writ petition before the Hon'ble Supreme Court bearing W.P.(Crl.) No. 202 of 2021, wherein one of the reliefs was regarding the provisional attachment order dated 03.02.2021. The said writ petition came to be dismissed on 01.07.2021 in the following terms: Heard the learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner(s). We find no ground to entertain these matters. The Writ Petitions are, accordingly, dismissed with costs of ₹ 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand) in each case, to be paid to the Supreme Court Legal Services Committee within two weeks from today. The Special Leave Petition also stands dismissed. Pending interlocuto ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
