Interest Recovery Invalid Without Form GST DRC-01D Intimation | HC
- News|Blog|GST & Customs|
- 2 Min Read
- By Taxmann
- |
- Last Updated on 25 November, 2025

Case Details: Bombay Art vs. Union of India - [2025] 179 taxmann.com 494 (Gujarat)
Judiciary and Counsel Details
- Bhargav D. Karia & Pranav Trivedi, JJ.
-
Hardik V. Vora, Adv. for the Petitioner.
-
Siddharth H. Dave & Utkarsh R. Sharma, Advs. for the Respondent.
Facts of the Case
The petitioner, a Hindu Undivided Family, received an intimation regarding short payment of interest on delayed payment of tax arising from its filed returns. Thereafter, the jurisdictional officer placed a lien on the petitioner’s account. Following the attachment, a portion of the amount under protest was deposited. It was contended that recovery proceedings required prior compliance, including issuance of intimation in Form GST DRC-01D and provision of an opportunity to submit a reply and to be heard, which had not been followed. The matter was accordingly placed before the High Court.
High Court Held
The High Court held that the recovery initiated by the jurisdictional officer was contrary to the statutory procedure governing recovery of interest under the CGST Act and the Gujarat GST Act. The Court observed that, in terms of Rule 88C read with Rule 142B, issuance of Form GST DRC-01D and granting an opportunity to respond are mandatory prerequisites before invoking Section 79. The Court accordingly quashed the impugned DRC-13 attachment and directed the jurisdictional officer to initiate proceedings afresh strictly in accordance with law, including issuance of Form GST DRC-01D and provision of reply and hearing opportunities.
List of Cases Reviewed
- Rajkamal Builder Infrastructure (P.) Ltd. v. Union of India [2021] 127 taxmann.com 150/88 GST 716/50 GSTL 153 (Gujarat)
- In case of Reliance Formulation (P.) Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of State Tax [2025] 176 taxmann.com 608 (Gujarat) (Para 10) followed
List of Cases Referred to
- Reliance Formulation (P.) Ltd. v. Asstt. Commissioner of State Tax [2025] 176 taxmann.com 608 (Gujarat) (para 9)
- Rajkamal Builder Infrastructure (P.) Ltd. v. Union of India [2021] 127 taxmann.com 150/88 GST 716/50 GSTL 153 (Gujarat) (para 10)
- Mahadeo Construction Co. v. Union of India [2020] 116 taxmann.com 262/81 GST 271/36 GSTL 343 (Jharkhand) (para 16).
Disclaimer: The content/information published on the website is only for general information of the user and shall not be construed as legal advice. While the Taxmann has exercised reasonable efforts to ensure the veracity of information/content published, Taxmann shall be under no liability in any manner whatsoever for incorrect information, if any.

Taxmann Publications has a dedicated in-house Research & Editorial Team. This team consists of a team of Chartered Accountants, Company Secretaries, and Lawyers. This team works under the guidance and supervision of editor-in-chief Mr Rakesh Bhargava.
The Research and Editorial Team is responsible for developing reliable and accurate content for the readers. The team follows the six-sigma approach to achieve the benchmark of zero error in its publications and research platforms. The team ensures that the following publication guidelines are thoroughly followed while developing the content:
- The statutory material is obtained only from the authorized and reliable sources
- All the latest developments in the judicial and legislative fields are covered
- Prepare the analytical write-ups on current, controversial, and important issues to help the readers to understand the concept and its implications
- Every content published by Taxmann is complete, accurate and lucid
- All evidence-based statements are supported with proper reference to Section, Circular No., Notification No. or citations
- The golden rules of grammar, style and consistency are thoroughly followed
- Font and size that’s easy to read and remain consistent across all imprint and digital publications are applied

CA | CS | CMA