1. Since the issues raised in both the captioned writ applications are the same, those were taken up for hearing analogously and are being disposed of by this common order.

2. For the sake of convenience, the Special Civil Application No.1521 of 2021 is treated as the lead matter.

3. By this writ application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the writ applicant has prayed for the following reliefs;

“(A) Your Lordships may be pleased to admit this Petition.

(B) Your Lordships may be pleased to issue Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, directing the Respondent No.3 to immediately remove provisional attachment of following Bank Account, belonging to Petitioner No.1

And that is how, debit may be allowed to be made from said accounts.

(C ) This Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction quashing and setting aside Form GST DRC-22 dated 24.07.2020 for provisional attachment of properties, annexed at “Annexure-B” to this petition.

(D) This Hon’ble Court may be pleased to quash and set aside the Order No.GSL/S.5(1)/S.83/B.14 dated 15.01.2018 issued by Commissioner of State annexed at Annexure-L to this petition, is without authority of law.

(E) Pending admission, hearing and till final disposal of this petition, Your Lordship may be pleased

(a) To direct the Respondent No.3 to provide the copy of relief upon documents of show-cause notice, to the petitioner.

(b) To direct the Respondent No.3 to expedite the Adjudicating proceeding and complete within three months from the date of supply of documents.

(F) Lordship may be pleased to grant an ex-parte ad-interim order in favour of Petitioner in terms of prayer Clause (B) hereinabove.

(G) To dispense with affidavit in support thereof.

(H) To quash the Order No.186 dated 06.05.2021 along with Form GST DRC-07 (Annexure-’R’ & Annexure-’T’) passed Ex-party, without the opportunity of personal hearing is gross violation of Principle of Natural Justice.

(I) Your Lordships will be pleased to give instruction to Respondent No.3 to supply relied upon documents, and after considering the Defence reply and providing an opportunity of personal hearing, to pass a speaking order and to follow the Principle of Natural Justice.

(J) To pass such further necessary and ancillary orders as the nature and circumstances of the case.

(K) To award costs of any incidental to this application be paid by the Respondent.

(L) Your Lordship may be pleased to grant such other further relief (s) that may be deemed fit and proper in the interest of justice in favour of the petitioner.”

4. We need not delve much into the facts of this case as we intend to dispose of this writ application on a short ground.

5. On 17th June, 2021, a Coordinate Bench of this Court passed the following order;

“1.Heard learned Advocate Mr. Mukund Kumar Chouhan for the petitioner on interim relief. He submits that the respondent had made provisional attachment of the shops of the petitioner exercising powers under Section 83 of the Gujarat Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017, to protect the interest of the Revenue and the respondent has also attached the Bank Account of the petitioner, having a balance of ₹ 63,642/-. According to the learned Advocate for the petitioner, with the attachment of the two shops, the interest of the Revenue is already protected and therefore, there was no need to attach the Bank Account.

2.He further submits that since the final order has already been passed, he would like to amend the petition as the petitioner has not been given any opportunity of hearing, even though objections were raised by the petitioner against the attachment of the properties, under Rule 159(5) of the CGST Rules. Mr. Chouhan further submits that because of provisional attachment of the Bank account, the petitioner is not even able to make payment to its employees and the entire business has also been adversely affected.

3.Learned Assistant Government Pleader Mr. Utkarsh Sharma for the respondents however submits that since the valuation of the properties attached by the respondent has not been made, the same shall be carried out at the earliest, and if the valuation is more than the amount of taxes payable by the petitioner as per the final order, the attachment shall be lifted even on the Bank Account. Mr. Sharma also seeks time to file a reply.

4.In view of the above, it is directed that the respondent authority shall make valuation of the properties attached vide order dated 27.07.2020 (Annexure ‘B’) before the next date of hearing and place on record the Report, and do the needful for lifting the attachment not required considering the liability of tax payable by the petitioner.

5.Learned Advocate for the petitioner Mr. Chouhan may file proposed amendment with regard to the subsequent events which have taken place. The respondent shall also file the reply to petition on the next date of hearing.

6.Put up on JUNE 25, 2021. “

6. Thereafter, on 2nd July, 2021, this court passed the following order;

“1. Heard, learned advocate Mr. Mukund Kumar Chouhan for the petitioner and learned AGP Mr. Utkarsh Sharma for the respondents.

2. Rule.

3. Learned advocate Mr. Chouhan for the petitioner has drawn the attention of the Court to the affidavit-in- reply filed by the respondent along with the valuation report of the properties of the petitioner, attached by the respondent on 24.08.2020 under section 83 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (herein after referred to as ‘the said Act’). From the said valuation report, it appears that the total value of the properties of the petitioner, including the bank account, provisionally attached by the respondent, is ₹ 15,57,833/-, whereas, the tax liability, including the interest and penalty of the petitioner, has been stated to be ₹ 17,54,106/-. The learned advocate for the petitioner has submitted that the bank account of the petitioner has been attached since 24.08.2020 and more than 10 months have already been passed. According to him, the said attachment cannot continue, even otherwise, after one year of the provisional attachment under section 83 of the said Act. Moreover, it is difficult for the petitioner to run the business on account of such attachment of the bank account.

4. Having regard to the submissions made by Mr. Chouhan for the petitioner, the Court is of the opinion that the provisional attachment of the bank account deserves to be lifted, more particularly, when the substantial tax liability has already been protected by the attachment of the shop, which is valued at about ₹ 15 lakhs.

4.1 Learned AGP Mr. Sharma has not resisted much on this issue.

5. In the aforesaid premises, by way of interim relief pending the petition, the provisional attachment in respect of the bank account of the petitioner being HDFC Bank Over Draft cum Saving Account No. 14168020001133, Nanpura, Surat, made by the respondent, is hereby lifted. It is clarified that the Court has not gone into the other issues with regard to the tax liability of the petitioner.”

7. We have heard Mr. Chouhan, the learned counsel appearing for the writ applicant and Mr. Utkarsh Sharma, the learned AGP appearing for the respondents.

8. It appears from the materials on record that a show-cause notice came to be issued to the writ applicant in Form GST DRC-01 dated 24th August, 2020 calling upon the writ applicant to show-cause as to why an amount of ₹ 16,21,853/- shall not be levied with interest and penalty for the alleged contraventions as mentioned in the show-cause notice.

9. Upon receipt of such show-cause notice, a formal reply was filed wherein the writ applicant requested the authority concerned to furnish him few documents which were referred to and relied upon in the show-cause notice. It is not in dispute that such documents as demanded by the writ applicant never came to be issued at any point of time. It appears that, thereafter, the authority concerned proceeded to pass the final order in MOV-07.

10. Mr. Chouhan would submit that at no point of time, his client was given any opportunity of hearing before passing the final order in MOV-07.

11. Mr. Sharma, the learned AGP appearing for the State would submit that let the matter be remitted to the authority concerned for fresh consideration.

12. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the impugned order passed by the authority concerned in MOV-07 is hereby quashed and set aside. The matter is remitted to the concerned authority. The concerned authority shall furnish all the documents as demanded by the writ applicant at the earliest. Once such documents are furnished, the writ applicant shall file an appropriate reply, and once the reply comes on record, the authority concerned shall give an opportunity of hearing and, thereafter, proceed to pass the final order on merits. Let the entire aforesaid exercise be undertaken at the earliest and completed within a period two months from the date of the receipt of the writ of this order.

13. For the very same reasons, the connected Special Civil Application No.1530 of 2021 also succeeds and is hereby allowed.