Page 89 - GSTL_23rd July 2020_Vol 38_Part 4

2020 ]WATERMELON MANAGEMENT SERVICES PVT. LTD. v. COMMR. OF CENTRAL TAX455
(iii) Petitioner shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence or any
document directly or indirectly;
(iv) Petitioner shall co-operate during the course of enquiry and shall
not leave the country without prior permission of the Magistrate or
the trial Court and he shall surrender his passport, if any, to the
concerned Authorized Officer;
(v) Petitioner shall appear as and when called for the purpose of any
further investigation; and
(vi) Petitioner shall not indulge in any similar offence.
19. In view of the disposal of the main petition, I.A. No. 1 of 2020 does
not survive for consideration. It is, accordingly, disposed of.
_______

2020 (38) G.S.T.L. 455 (Del.)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Manmohan and Sanjeev Narula, JJ.
WATERMELON MANAGEMENT SERVICES PVT. LTD.
Versus
COMMR. OF CENTRAL TAX
COMMR. OF CENTRAL TAX, GST DELHI (EAST)
COMMR. OF CENTRAL TAX
W.P. (C) No. 3274 of 2020, decided on 29-5-2020
Writ jurisdiction - Maintainability - Efficacious alternative remedy -
Provisional attachment - Failure to issue notice prior to attachment - Assessee
can file an objection within seven days of attachment - Authority directed to
treat writ petition as objection and decide matter within 3 working days - Rule
159(5) of Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 - Sections 74 and 83 of
Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. [paras 7, 8, 9]
Petition disposed of
CASE CITED
Pranit Hem Desai v. Additional Director General — C/SCA No. 7321 of 2019,
decided on 12-4-2019 by Gujarat High Court — Relied on .................................................. [Paras 8, 9]
REPRESENTED BY : Shri Sunil Upadhyay, Advocate, for the Petitioner.
Shri Harpreet Singh, Advocate, for the Respondent.
[Order]. - The writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution
has been listed before this Bench by the Registry in view of the urgency ex-
pressed therein.
2. The matter has been heard by way of video conferencing.
3. Present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the
provisional attachment order dated 5th March, 2020 issued by respondent No. 1
to the petitioner’s bankers.
4. Learned Counsel for petitioner states that in the absence of any no-
tice issued under Section 74 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017
(hereinafter referred to as ‘Act, 2017’), no order of attachment under Section 83 of
the Act, 2017 could have been passed by the respondents.

GST LAW TIMES  23rd July 2020  89