^®
TaxReply India Private Limited

GST Library

Best GST Library

Subscription Plans

TaxGPT

GST News | Updates

GST Calendar

GST Case Laws

GST Case Laws Sitemap

GST Notifications, Circulars, Releases etc.

Act & Rules

Act & Rules (Multi-view)

GST Rates

HSN Codes ^New

GST Forms

GST Diary

GST Notebook

GST Fees Manager

GST Council Meetings

GST Set-off Calculator

ITC Reversal Calculator

E-invoice Calculator

Inverted Duty Calculator

GSTR-3B Manual

GSTR-9 Manual

GSTR-9C Manual

Full Site Search

E-way Bill

Finance Bill

GST e-books

TaxReply Support

YouTube Videos

Twitter

Buy Premium Tax Domains

About Us

Our Services

🔒

TaxReply India Pvt Ltd

🔒

^®

Subscribe Free GST updates on...

Subscribe to Best GST Library of India and get ahead of the rest. Click here for plans. | GST Act & Rules e-book Click here. |

VASUDEV TRADING COMPANY vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS
(Punjab and Haryana High Court)

Hon'ble Judges:

AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH
MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA

Pet. Counsel

Sachin Mittal

Res. Counsel

Sunish Bindlish

Petitioner / Applicant	VASUDEV TRADING COMPANY
Respondent	UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS
Court	Punjab and Haryana High Court
State	Punjab
Date	Feb 15, 2021
Order No.	CWP-2962-2021
Citation	2021(2) TAXREPLY 3898
Add to Favorites	Add to favorites.
Download Original Order
Print (Full Page)
Print (Judgement Only)

Related Tags :

☍

Section 83

TaxGPT ^Beta

Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

AA |

ORDER
On the last date of hearing, following order was passed:- “Learned counsel for respondent No.1-UOI prays for a short adjournment to seek instructions with regard to the assertion as has been made by the petitioner that its account was attached provisionally on 13.08.2019 which could continue only upto 12.08.2020 in the light of Section 83(2) of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act which limits the operation of such order of provisional attachment for one year.” In pursuance thereof, short written statement on behalf of respondent Nos.1 to 3 dated 15.02.2021 has been received through mail, which is taken on record. The factual assertion, as has been pointed out by the petitioner with regard to more than one year having been passed of provisional attachment order, has not been disputed. However, it has been asserted that the evidence has been collected to the effect that the input tax credit has wrongly been availed of by the petitioner. Be that as it may, the....