SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Bom) 961

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
G. S. KULKARNI, AARTI SATHE, JJ.
Nivara Infradevelopers LLP - Petitioner
Versus
The Union of India – Respondent 
WRIT PETITION (L) NO.7888 OF 2026
Decided On : 02-04-2026
Advocates Appeared : 
For the Petitioner : Mr.Ishaan V.Patkar with Mr.Vinit V.Raje, Mr.Sanskar R.Ahire i/by Alaksha Legal
For the Respondent : Mr.Amar Mishra, AGP

Advocates:
For the Petitioners: Ishaan V.Patkar, Vinit V.Raje, Sanskar R.Ahire i/by Alaksha Legal
For the Respondents: Amar Mishra

Provisional attachment of bank accounts under GST Section 83 is invalid absent recorded opinion based on tangible material showing necessity to protect revenue; strict compliance mandatory, non-adherence warrants quashing and costs.

Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Article 226 - Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 - Section 83 - Provisional attachment of bank accounts - Draconian power exercisable only upon formation of opinion by proper officer on tangible material that it is necessary for protecting revenue interests - Opinion must precede attachment, be recorded in writing with proximate nexus to purpose, and follow procedural rules - Attachment without reasons, opinion, or prior opportunity illegal and arbitrary - Same-day issuance of pre-intimation and attachment notice violates due process - Liberty to issue show cause notice if material exists. (Paras 2,4,9,10)

(B) Administrative Law - Abuse of power - High-handed, extraneous actions by officers breaching mandatory procedure and ignoring representations warrant personal costs to enforce rule of law and deter repetition - Deprivation of property rights under Article 300A without procedure entails civil consequences. (Paras 10,11,12)

Facts of the case:
Petition under Article 226 challenging provisional attachment orders issued to banks on same day as pre-attachment intimation (DRC-23), during pendency of investigation under section 67(2), without disclosing formed opinion, reasons, or tax demand period; petitioner objected offering alternate security, ignored.

Findings of Court:
Impugned orders quashed and set aside; respondents at liberty to issue show cause notice expeditiously within six weeks if tangible material exists, to be concluded per law; costs of Rs.25,000/- imposed on concerned officer payable to State Legal Services Authority.

Issues: Whether attachment orders complied with Section 83 preconditions including opinion formation on tangible material; validity of coercive action bypassing procedure and ignoring objections.

Ratio Decidendi: Exercise of provisional attachment demands strict observance of statutory components - opinion formation before order, necessity beyond expediency, proportionality, tangible basis - non-compliance subjects action to quashing as arbitrary breach of civil rights.

Result: Petition disposed of with attachments quashed.

JUDGMENT :

G.S.Kulkarni, J.

1. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed praying for the following substantive reliefs :

(c) that the Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue a writ of certiorari or any other writ, direction or order quashing and setting aside the Impugned Orders dated 23 January 2026 being Exhibits A and B to this Petition;

(d) pending the hearing and final disposal of the present Petition, the Hon'ble Court may be pleased to stay the operation of the Impugned Orders dated 23 January 2026 being Exhibits A and B to this Petition and consequently direct the Respondent No.4 to forthwith withdraw the attachment of the bank accounts.”

2. The grievance of the Petitioner is primarily against the impugned orders of attachment dated 23rd January 2026 (Exhibits A and B respectively). The impugned orders are intimation to the Petitioner’s bankers namely Punjab National Bank, Mumbai and Saraswat Co-operative Bank Limited, Mumbai attaching the bank accounts of the Petitioner. One of such intimation issued to Punjab National Bank is extracted below :

“Government of Maharashtra
Department of Goods and Service Tax

Office of The,
Joint Commissioner of State Tax, .
Investigation-A,
C-Wlng, 2nd Floor, Old Building,, GST Bhavan, Mazgaon,
Mumbai-400010



No/JCST/lNV-A/ M/s. Nivara Infradevelopers LLP /DRC-22/2025-26/E-118
Mumbai Dated 23-01-2026

“FORM GST DRC- 22"
(See rule 159[1])

To, 

The Manager,
Punjab National Bank,
Samartha Mandir, Bhalerao Wadi, Hanuman Road,
Vileparle East, Mumbai, Maharashtra - 400057.
IFSC: PUNB0373600
Account No: 373600210101957




Provisional attachment of Bank Account under section 83

It is to inform that M/s. Nivara lnfradevelopers LLP (GSTIN 27AAKFN9501B1ZF) having principal place of business at CTS No.185 185/1 to 8 , Jalmeena Chs , Tejpal Scheme, Road No.5 Junction , Vile Parle East , Mumbai Suburban, Maharashtra-400057 bearing registration number as 27AAKFN9501B1ZF, PAN AAKFN9501B is a registered taxable person under the MGST/CGST Act.2017. Mr. Prasad Shantaram Patil and Mr. Nilesh Shantaram Patil are the partners of M/s. Nivara lnfradevelopers LLP. Proceedings have been launched against the aforesaid taxable person under section 67(2) of the said Act to determine the tax or any other amount due from the said person. As per information available with the department, it has come to my notice that the said person has account in your bank having account no.3736002101019575.

In order to protect the interests of revenue and in exercise of the powers conferred under section 83 of the Act, I Prerna Deshbhratar (IAS), Joint Commissioner of State Tax, Investigation-A, hereby provisionally attach the aforesaid account.

No debit shall be allowed to be made from the said account or any other account operated by the aforesaid person on the same PAI\: without the prior permission of this department.

Prerane Deshbhratar (IAS]
Joint Commissioner of State Tax,
lnvestigation-A, Mumbai.

1) Deputy Commissioner of State Tax, Inv-A (E-0101)

2) Assistant Commissioner of State Tax, Inv-A, (D-0103)

3) M/s. Nivara lnfradevelopers LLP.”

3. It appears from the record that prior thereto, on the even date, i.e. on 23rd January 2026, the Petitioner was issued a pre-attachment communication in DRC-23, however, on the very same day, the impugned attachment notices to the Petitioner’s bankers, as extracted hereinabove, came to be issued.

4. It is Petitioner’s contention that on a plain reading of the impugned notice, as also the pre-intimation to the attachment, which is dated 23rd January 2026, it is clear that basic principles of law are not followed, inasmuch as, apart from the impugned attachment, the pre-intimation does not disclose any opinion being formed and in respect of the period in regard to which such tax is being demanded, as set out in a statement appearing at page 2 of the pre-intimation notice dated 23rd Janury 2026. It is the Petitioner’s contention that any action of provisional attachment without any opinion being formed, is to

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top