GST Rulings

Can Bank Account Held Jointly with Third Party be Provisionally Attached?

HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY - JUDGMENT DATED FEBRUARY 9, 2021 - WP(L) NO. 5842 OF 2020

Background: Petitioner (sub-contractor) opened an escrow account with contractor as the first account holder. Proceeds from supply were deposited into the escrow account by the contractor’s customer. Of the funds deposited, bank was directed to transfer 3% to the contractor and 97% to the sub-contractor.

The Revenue provisionally attached the said escrow account while proceeding against the contractor.

Issue: The sub-contractor is not a party to any proceedings by the Revenue. In such situation, can a bank account (held jointly by the contractor and the sub-contractor) be provisionally attached?

Decision: A plain reading of Section 83(1) of CGST Act indicates that property belonging to the taxable person (against whom proceedings are pending) can only be provisionally attached. However, in this case, no proceedings have been initiated by the Revenue against the sub-contractor (who is a joint account holder, entitled to 97% of receipts in the said account). Hence, the rights of the sub-contractor are adversely affected.

Vide Rule 159(5) of CGST Rules, any person whose property is attached under Section 83 ibid can file an objection within seven days of such attachment. Accordingly, the Commissioner should afford an opportunity of being heard. After such hearing, the Commissioner may release the property by an order in Form GST DRC-23.

Accordingly, the sub-contractor had filed objection. Until a decision is taken by the Revenue on such objections filed, the sub-contractor was directed to maintain a balance of Rs.5 lakh. In effect, the provisional attachment on the sub-contractor’s share in the escrow account was lifted. However, the provisional attachment on the contractor’s share remains.

Comments: Section 83 of CGST Act permits provisional attachment of property belonging only to the taxable person. In instances where bank account (jointly held with third party) is attached, the aggrieved (third) party should duly file their objections under Rule 159(5) ibid and may seek judicial remedy if there is no response or belated response on the part of Revenue.

Srinivasan V, Advocate

Recent Posts

P&H HC issues detailed guidelines on ITC denial for supplier’s non-payment

Background According to Section 16(2)(c) of the CGST Act, if tax charged in respect of…

3 weeks ago

Can consequential refund, arising from OIA, be rejected by OIO?

Background Order-in-Original (OIO, which partly rejected refund) was set aside by Order-in-Appeal (OIA). Fresh refund…

1 month ago

Inviolable principles governing Section 74 proceedings

"But for the audit undertaken by the Department, the suppression of facts would have gone…

1 month ago

Non-response to SCN & DRC01A construed as suppression: Madras HC

Background Intimation in DRC-01A and Show Cause Notice (SCN) were issued. The Petitioner failed to…

3 months ago

HC quashes GST notice & order for non-quantification of interest in notice

Issue The show cause notice issued to the Petitioner did not quantify the proposed demand…

6 months ago

Is limitation period of 2 years applicable to duplicate payments under GST law?

Issue The petitioner in the citation referred first infra, by mistake, made a duplicate payment…

7 months ago