The Delhi High Court while lifting the attachment held that the provisional attachment cannot continue beyond 1 year.
The bench of Justice Prathiba M. Singh and Justice Shail Jain have observed that as per the mandate in Section 83(2) of the GST Act, the provisional attachment cannot continue beyond one year and in the present case the same has already lapsed. The provisional attachment of the Petitioner’s bank account was lifted.
The petitioner/assessee has challenged the letter in FORM GST DRC-22 issued by Additional Director General, Directorate of GST Intelligence, Gurugram Zonal Unit (DGGI) by which the bank account of the Petitioner has been provisionally attached under Section 83 of the Central Goods and Services Act, 2017.
An investigation was initiated against the Petitioner under Section 74 of the CGST Act on the ground of unpaid taxes by the Petitioner. Pursuant to the investigation, the impugned letter was issued by DGGI to the concerned Bank directing provisional attachment of the Petitioner’s bank account.
The Petitioner contended that in view of Section 83(2) of the CGST Act, the provisional attachment cannot continue beyond one year and the period has already expired.
The court directed the Bank Manager to de-attach/ de-freeze the concerned bank account and the Petitioner is permitted to operate the same.
Case Details
Case Title: M/S Tirupati Steel Through Proprietor Rahul Mittal Versus UOI
Case No.: W.P.(C) 12844/2025, CM APPL. 52483/2025 & CM APPL. 52484/2025
Date: August 25, 2025
Counsel For Petitioner: Prabhat Kumar
Counsel For Respondent: Archana Gaur
Read More: Fraudulent GST ITC | Rs. 50K Cost Imposed On Writ Petitioner For Concealing Facts: Delhi High Court
