Skip to content

Part-48-One Pager Snapshot to the Latest Cases

-Order disposing objections submitted in Rule 159(5) is not an appealable order and only remedy available is writ.
-Mere noting in the File does not tantamount to order being passed.
-Commissioner has the power to attach bank account under Section 83 of a person located outside the State.
-For Financial Credit Notes issued for post-sale discount, No ITC reversal required.
-E-way required to be generated even for transaction other than supply.

S.No

Section

Case Subject

Case

Held

1

Section
83

Order disposing objections
submitted in Rule 159(5) is
not an appealable order and
only remedy available is
writ.
Expiry of one Year from the
date of provisional
attachment makes the
order inoperative.
Mere noting in the File does
not tantamount to order
being passed.
Commissioner has the
power to attach bank
account under Section 83 of
a person located outside
the State.

Bharat Parihar v. State
of Maharashtra [2023]
152 taxmann.com 6
(Bombay)

High Court relying upon decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the matter of Radha Krishan Industries v. State of Himachal
Pradesh [2021] 6 Supreme Court Cases 771 held that order disposing the objections to provisional attachment of bank
account was not an appealable order and only remedy available was invocation of writ jurisdiction under Article 226.
The order for Provisional Attachment was made on 21st April 2022 and period of one year from the said date expired on 21st
April 2023. Therefore, provisional attachment order dated 21st April 22 ceased to have effect by operation of law and was
held not operative after 21st April 23.
Revenue sent a letter dated 19th April 2023 to the bankers with a copy marked to the Petitioner for continuation of attachment.
They stated that fresh order passed was noted on the order sheet. The High Court did not find any fresh order having being
passed to attach the bank account on 19th April 2023 and mere noting’s in the file of the concerned Officer was held to be
not to constitute an order without a formal order as the law may mandate being passed and most importantly such
order being communicated to the affected person, whose bank account is attached. Revenue failed to show firstly such
order being passed and secondly being served on the Petitioner. The High Court further observed that the revenue has also
not disputed that letter of 19th April 2023 was only a communication to the bank, to retain provisional attachment of the
account and thus, it can never be a fresh order under Section 83(1) provisionally attaching the Petitioner's bank
account.
It was submitted by the Petitioner that Respondents do not have the jurisdiction to pass the provisional attachment order, since
the Petitioner was in Chennai and the bank account, in respect of which the provisional attachment order was communicated,
was also in Chennai. The High Court observed that Sub-section (1) of Section 83 empowers Commissioner to provisionally
attach any property, including bank account belonging of taxable person or "any person" specified in Section 122(1-A) and
Section 122(1-A), refers to "any person", who has retained benefit of a transaction and in whose presence, transaction is
conducted. It does not contemplate of a situation where the person should be located within the State in which the transaction is
carried out. Therefore, Respondents were held to have the jurisdiction to resort to the provisions of Section 83 of the
Act with respect to the Petitioner located in Chennai.
Cases Referred- Radha Krishan Industries v. State of Himachal Pradesh [2021] 6 Supreme Court Cases 771, Guru Nanak
Motor House v. Union of India 2021-TIOL-2017-HC-Mum-GST

2

Section
7,
Section
15 and
Section
16

For Financial Credit Notes
issued for post-sale
discount, No ITC reversal
required as there was no
corresponding reduction of
outward liability at the end
of the supplie

Vedmutha Electricals
India (P.) Ltd [2023]
152 taxmann.com 7
(AAR - ANDHRA
PRADESH

Applicant was issued commercial credit notes for Turnover Discounts, Quantity Discounts, Cash Discounts, Additional Scheme
Discounts. The credit notes issued were without GST. The supplier had made no adjustment in price in respect of goods already
sold. The petitioner relied upon Circular No. 122/3/2010, dated 30-4-2010 issued by CBEC in context of Rule 4(7) of the Cenvat
Credit Rules, 2004, Circular No. 877/15/2008-CX, dated 17th November, 2008, regarding reversal of Cenvat credit in case of
trade discount and C.B.E. & C. Flyer NO. 19, DATED1-1-2018. AAR held that corresponding reduction in ITC was not
warranted as there was no corresponding reduction of outward liability by the supplier.

3

Section
129 read
with Rule
138

E-way Bill required to be
generated even for
transaction other than
supply

KIA Motors India (P.)
Ltd. v. State of
Madhya Pradesh
[2023] 152
taxmann.com 9
(Madhya Pradesh)

The petitioner contended that demo vehicle was transported in the State of Madhya Pradesh not for sale and therefore, was not
exigible to GST. The High Court observed that Rule 138(1)(ii) makes it clear that causing of movement of a goods exceeding
the value of Rs.50,000/- even for the reasons other than supply, makes it incumbent upon the supplier to inform about the supply
of goods in Form-A GST, EWB-01 alongwith other information as required and no such information as mandatory in Rule 138(1)
of GST Rules, was given by the petitioner supplier. Therefore, in absence of information given, entry of demo car into the
State of Madhya Pradesh was held to be exigible to GST