Facts of the Case:In this case, the petitioner challenged an appellate order by which the petitioner’s appeal against the original order came to be dismissed. Subsequent to the dismissal of the appeal, the GST authorities initiated recovery proceedings and attached the petitioner’s bank account.
The petitioner submitted that it was ready and willing to deposit 10% of the balance tax in dispute, as required under Section 112(8) of the CGST Act, and to prefer an appeal before the GST Appellate Tribunal, once it becomes functional. On this basis, the petitioner sought lifting of the bank attachment, contending that upon such deposit, recovery proceedings are deemed to be stayed under Section 112(9). The revenue did not dispute the statutory position and fairly submitted that upon deposit of the amount contemplated under Section 112(8), recovery of the remaining amount would stand stayed by operation of law.
Issue:
Whether, upon the petitioner’s willingness to deposit 10% of the disputed tax under Section 112(8) of the CGST Act, the attachment of the bank account and recovery proceedings are required to be lifted/stayed by virtue of Section 112(9), pending appeal before the GST Appellate Tribunal.
Held that:
The High Court held that once a taxpayer deposits a sum equivalent to 10% of the remaining tax in dispute in terms of Section 112(8) of the CGST Act, the statutory consequence under Section 112(9) automatically follows, namely that recovery proceedings for the balance amount shall be deemed to be stayed.
The Court observed that in view of the petitioner’s clear undertaking to make the statutory pre-deposit, there was no purpose in keeping the writ petition pending. It was directed that if the petitioner deposits the required amount within two weeks, the attachment of the petitioner’s bank account with Punjab National Bank shall be lifted forthwith, as the recovery proceedings would stand stayed by operation of law.
The Court further clarified that upon such deposit, the petitioner’s apprehension regarding attachment of other bank accounts would no longer survive. Liberty was granted to the petitioner to prefer an appeal before the GST Appellate Tribunal, as and when the Tribunal becomes functional and commences hearing appeals.
Case Name: S. S. Civil Construction (P.) Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Revenue, State Tax, Ultadanga, Cossipore, Belgachia Charge dated 24.12.2025
To read the complete judgement 2025 Taxo.online 3454
