The Hon’ble High Court of Bombay vide its Order dated 10 January 2022 in the matter of M/s Futurist Innovation & Advertising Vs. Union of India and others, in Writ Petition (ST) No. – 15785 of 2021 held that the provisional attachment levied by the Respondent under Section 83(2) of the CGST Act, 2017 ceases to have effect on expiry of one year.

The Petitioner preferred the Writ Petition for setting aside the provisional attachment of its bank account in Canara Bank, Mumbai through letter dated 11 October 2019 issued by the Assistant Commissioner (Anti-Evasion), Goods and Service Tax, GST Bhavan, Faridabad, Haryana. It was contended on behalf of the petitioner that the provisional attachment dated 11 October 2019 of its Bank Account expired on 10 October 2020 in view of Section 83(2) of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017. Further the petitioner referred the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of Radha Krishan Industries Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and submitted that the provisional attachment cannot continue beyond the period of one year in view of Section 83(2) of the Act.

The Hon’ble High Court relied upon the judgment of the Apex Court in the matter of Radha Krishan Industries (supra) where in it was decided that the ‘power to order a provisional attachment is entrusted during pendency of the proceedings under any of the specified provisions under Sections 63, 64, 67, 73 or 74. It is when a proceeding under any of these provisions is pending that a provisional attachment can be ordered. It is held that under sub-section (2) of Section 83, a provisional attachment ceases to have effect upon the expiry of the period of one year of the order being passed under sub section (1)’.

That Hon’ble High Court with the above findings allowed the Writ Petition and held that the provisional attachment ordered by the Respondents on 11 October 2019 under Section 83(2) of the Act ceased to have effect on expiry of one year from the date of Order.