9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (6) TMI 405X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Saving Account No. 913020052890081 with AXIS Bank, Bhavnagar, (iv) Current Account No.917020078218171 with AXIS Bank, Bhavnagar and (v) Saving Account No.200010100040488 with AXIS BANK, Bhavnagar; (b) Pending notice, admission and final hearing of this petition, the Honourable Court may be pleased to direct Respondent No.2 to lift the attachment over (i) Cash Credit Account No.27205501066 with ICICI Bank, Bhavnagar, (ii) Current Account No. 27205501065 with ICICI Bank, Bhavnagar, (iii) Saving Account No.200010100040488 with AXIS BANK, Bhavnagar; (c) Be pleased to pass such other and further order as may be deemed fit and necessary in the facts and circumstances of the case;" [2] The background of the facts which has given rise to this petition is that petitioner is a proprietary firm, is dealing with the business of purchase and sales of Oxygen Gas Cylinder, Old and Used Cylinder, Cylinder Cap etc. and it is also registered with respondent authority having GST No.24ACKPM9318DIZM and regularly filing returns and paying the tax as well. The petitioner received one summons on 02.09.2019 issued in purported exercise of power under Section 70 of the Central GST Act, 2017 from t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ected. The said Cash Credit Account, according to petitioner, is an account, which enables the assessee to borrow the money from the bank for the purpose of its business and as such, a request was made to lift the attachment but instead authority without compliance of statutory procedure passed an order on 17.06.2022 which has constrained the petitioner to approach this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. [3] The Co-ordinate Bench of this Court after initial hearing was pleased to issue Notice, returnable on 24.08.2022 and by way of ex parte ad-interim relief directed respondent authority to lift the attachment over Cash Credit Account No.27205501066 with ICICI Bank, Bhavnagar and later on, after submission of affidavit-in-reply, the matter has come up consideration before this Court in which Mr. Premal R. Joshi, learned advocate has represented the petitioner whereas Ms. Maithili D. Mehta, learned advocate appearing on behalf of respondent No.2 and Mr. Aakash Gupta, learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing on behalf of respondent No.1. [4] Mr. Premal R. Joshi, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner has vehemently contended that the Cash Credit Acco ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... earned Assistant Government Pleader appearing on behalf of respondent No.1 have vehemently opposed the petition and contended that the respondent authority had initiated proceedings under Section 70 of the Goods and Service Tax Act, firstly, by issuing summons and pursuant to that, the authorized representative of the petitioner, appeared before the authority, wherein a specific opportunity was given and further instructed to supply certain other documents and still such process is on and as such the respondent authority has prima facie framed the opinion on the basis of representation made by the representative of the petitioner and it is only upon such satisfactory note the authority had initiated steps under Section 83 of the CGST Act to protect the interest of revenue and this attachment of the Bank Account is the only substantial measure by virtue of which the interest of revenue can be protected and therefore, there is no merit in any of the contentions raised by the petitioner. [5.1] It has further been contended that the Government had amended the provisions of Section 83 of the CGST Act, which covers various chapters in Section 83 of the CGST Act and the said chapters inc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and to produce the documents and as such has contended that when the act has authorized the officer to deal with such eventuality, it cannot be contended by petitioner that action is impermissible in law. In fact, Ms. Mehta, learned advocate has also drawn the attention to yet another decision delivered by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, which is in the case of Nathalal Maganlal Chauhan versus State of Gujarat reported in (2020) 114 taxmann.com 425 (Gujarat) and has referred to relevant paragraphs and has submitted that in the background of present facts and circumstances, it is always open for an authority to initiate steps which are challenged in the present proceedings. [5.5] Apart from that, Ms. Mehta, learned advocate and Mr. Gupta, learned Assistant Government Pleader in chorus have submitted that there is no serious prejudice now likely to be caused to the petitioner in view of the fact that one of the Bank Accounts in the form of Cash Credit Account No.27205501066 with ICICI Bank, Bhavnagar has already been lifted from attachment by virtue of order dated 27.07.2022 and as such when the petitioner has got a partial relief there is hardly any reason to continue to invoke ex ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he High Court in exercise of extraordinary equitable jurisdiction when a satisfaction is arrived at by an authority that interest of revenue deserves to be protected hence we are of the clear opinion that in the absence of any material or patent illegality such satisfaction cannot be disturbed or substituted for the sake of substitution and we have satisfied ourselves that background of fact is such where the process cannot be intercepted when it has already commenced. That be so, no case is made out to call for any interference under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. [7] At this stage, we may quote few observations made by Hon'ble Apex Court on the issue of exercise of extraordinary jurisdiction as to whether High Court can usurp the discretion of an authority or not. In case of D.N.Jeevaraj versus Chief Secretary, Government of Karnataka and others reported in (2016) 2 SCC 653, the Hon'ble Apex Court has propounded on the issue. The relevant observations contained in paras 41 and 43, we may quote hereunder:- "41. This Court has repeatedly held that where discretion is required to be exercised by a statutory authority, it must be permitted to do so. It is not fo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n-rejoinder or in any form. From the said background, we feel it necessary to quote hereunder as we have formulated an opinion that this is not a fit case to exercise extraordinary jurisdiction. We deem it proper to quote hereunder:- "8.1. It is submitted that prima facie it appears from the records that the present Petitioner i.e., Royal Corporation has availed the ineligible input tax credit by showing the purchases form below mentioned fictitious firms: Sr. No. GSTN Firm Name 1 24DLBPB5148H1ZG 7 STAR TRADING CO 2 24DUXPM2724R1ZO A M ENTERPRISES 3 24FUIPS7956A1ZA ABHI TRADERS 4 24AYHPJ9115A1ZU APPLE ENTERPRISE 5 24EJJPM8321L1ZU GAUTAM ENTERPRISE 6 24AFMPU2832F1ZD GREEN TRADERS 7 24DBXPP6504H1Z7 GUJARAT ENTERPRISE 8 24DDNPR1191A1ZO GURUKRUPA TRADERS 9 24CAOPC1073P1ZH M M ENTERPRISE 10 24EAZPB6435H1ZE MAHAVIR ENTERPRIS 11 24DCRPM0355Q2ZX NAKSH TRADING 12 24DCJPR4454M1Z1 ORANGE SALES AGENCY 13 24BVNPK2004B1Z8 R. V. TRADERS 14 24AYNPJ4123G2ZL ROLEX ENTERPRISE 15 24BKRPM6978H1ZD S K ENTERPRISES 16 24EEZPB4071P1ZT S M TRADING 17 24ACKPZ2060K1Z9 SHIV ENTERPRISE 18 24DJOPR382 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... opinion, as well as satisfactory note qua to that aspect, is not sustainable reason being that the Respondent authority has sufficient materials on record. The detailed satisfactory note was prepared and supplied to the Petitioner at the time of attaching the bank accounts and therefore the action of the Respondent authority is just and proper and if the attachment may be removed by this Hon'ble Court, the Government may incur a huge loss. For the sake of the interest of the government revenue the action which was taken under Section 83 of the Act is after satisfying all the conditions as per Section 83 of the Act and therefore the Order which was passed under Section 83 was within the jurisdiction of the Respondent authority and the action taken by the Respondent authority are just and proper. Based on the prima facie materials on the record, this Hon'ble Court may dismiss the petition at the stage where the proceedings are pending before the authority." [9] The aforesaid particulars which are provided in the affidavit-in-reply and gone undenied cannot be ignored by the Court and when the substantial justice is pitted against technical consideration, the Court would lik ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nother reported in (2011) 7 SCC 639 to the aforesaid extent:- 59. The Court should not place reliance upon a judgment without discussing how the factual situation fits in with a fact-situation of the decision on which reliance is placed, as it has to be ascertained by analysing all the material facts and the issues involved in the case and argued on both sides. A judgment may not be followed in a given case if it has some distinguishing features. A little difference in facts or additional facts may make a lot of difference to the precedential value of a decision. A judgment of the Court is not to be read as a statute, as it is to be remembered that judicial utterances have been made in setting of the facts of a particular case. One additional or different fact may make a world of difference between the conclusions in two cases. Disposal of cases by blindly placing reliance upon a decision is not proper. (Vide: Municipal Corporation of Delhi v. Gurnam Kaur, AIR 1989 SC 38; Govt. of Karnataka & Ors. v. Gowramma & Ors., AIR 2008 SC 863; and State of Haryana & Anr. v. Dharam Singh & Ors. (2009) 4 SCC 340)" [12] Now coming to the decision which is in the case of Vinodkumar Murlidhar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... een clearly asserted in the stand by an authority in affidavit-in-reply that amendment of Section 83 of the CGST Act covers various chapters in Section 83 CGST Act and the said chapters include the proceedings under Section 70 of the Act and as such in view of the same if the proceedings under the Central Goods and Service Tax carried out by an authority and if said proceeding is pending before any authority in that case the respondent authority has got power to initiate proceedings under Section 83 of the CGST Act and this stand has gone uncontroverted and as such we are of the clear opinion that no case is made out by the petitioner to call for any interference. [15] At this stage, Ms. Maithili D. Mehta, learned advocate has successfully tried to assist the Court by referring to the decision in the case of Nathalal Maganlal Chauhan (supra) wherein in paragraphs 56 and 57 the Hon'ble Court has already opined on the issue of delegation of powers. However, here in the present case on hand, the background of facts are such which are not controverted, as indicated above, we are of the opinion that irrespective of aforesaid issue tried to be canvassed by Mr. Joshi, learned advocat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
