GST Rulings

GST Provisional Attachment: Can Entire GST Demand be Recovered During Limitation Period of Appeal?

Brief Facts

The Revenue authorities instituted recovery proceedings and recovered the entire amount of demand within three months from the date of order of the first appellate authority (which had ruled in favour of the Revenue). It appears such recovery was on the strength of a subsisting provisional attachment.

However, the assessee had the right to appeal before the Appellate Tribunal within the limitation period of three months, upon payment of 20% of disputed tax liability. [ref: Section 112(8) of the CGST Act]

Order

[By the Hon’ble High Court of Calcutta][1] When provisions related to appeal are available in the statute, the GST authorities can recover only 20% of the disputed tax.

[1] W.P. No. 22281 (W) of 2019 and C.A.N. No. 11697 of 2019; Order dated January 22, 2020

Author's Comments

Section 83 ibid permits provisional attachment only during pendency of any proceedings under Sections 62, 63, 64, 67, 73 or 74 ibid. However, in the instant case, Order-in-Appeal has been passed.

When the pre-deposit is paid, recovery proceeding for the balance amount is deemed to be stayed till the disposal of appeal [ref: Section 112(9) ibid]. Although the Tribunal is yet to be constituted under the GST law, assessee proceeding on appeal should make use of this safeguard to avoid recovery proceeding from revenue authorities.

Srinivasan V, Advocate

Share
Published by
Srinivasan V, Advocate
Tags: GST | AppealGST | Provisional Attachment
6 years ago

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