THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI APARESH KUMAR SINGH AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.M.MOHIUDDIN WRIT PETITION No.3871 of 2025

ORDER:

Heard Mr. Uma Shankar, learned counsel representing Mr. V.Veeresham, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. P.Shashi Kiran, learned counsel for respondent No.1, Ms. Pravalika, learned counsel representing Mr. Dominic Fernandes, learned Senior Standing Counsel for Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC) appearing for respondent No.2 and Ms. Muvva R.A.Sri Lakshmi, learned counsel for respondent No.6.

2. Writ petition has been preferred with the following prayer:

“For all the reasons stated in the accompanying affidavit, it is prayed that this Hon’ble High Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order, or direction more particularly one in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus (i) To declare DRC 22 dated 11.11.2024 issued to HDFC Bank (Respondent No.6) (Account No. 16302000001397) and DRC 22 dated 11.11.2024 issued to Gayatri Bank (Respondent No.7) (Account No. 100002104012345) by the 2nd Respondent under the provisions of CGST/TGST Act, 2017 as being void, arbitrary, illegal, without jurisdiction and without authority of law apart from being violative of Articles 14, 19(1)(g) and 265 of the Constitution of India, and to consequently set aside any action taken pursuant thereto and pass such further or other order(s) as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.

(ii) To declare the DRC 22 dated 06.11.2024 issued to Axis Bank Cash Credit Account (Respondent No.5) (No. 919030082843038) by the 2^nd Respondent as being void, arbitrary, illegal, without jurisdiction and without authority of law apart from being violative of Articles 14, 19(1)(g) and 265 of the Constitution of India and/or pass such further or other order(s) as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.

(iii) To declare the letter dated 15.01.2025 issued by Respondent No. 2 as being void, arbitrary, illegal, without jurisdiction and without authority of law apart from being violative of Articles 14, 19(1)(g) and 265 of the Constitution of India and/or pass such further or other order(s) as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.”

3. By the impugned orders, three accounts of the petitioner were provisionally attached under Section 83(1) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the CGST Act’). By our earlier order dated 20.08.2025, the provisional attachment of Bank Account No.919030082843038 attached on 06.11.2024 maintained in Axis Bank, Jagtial Branch, Telangana was set aside. The provisional attachment as respects the other two accounts remain. The relevant provisions as relating to provisional attachment are Section 83 of the CGST Act and Rule 159 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the CGST Rules’), which are extracted hereunder:

“83. Provisional attachment to protect revenue in certain cases (1) Where, after the initiation of any proceeding under Chapter XII, Chapter XIV or Chapter XV, the Commissioner is of the opinion that for the purpose of protecting the interest of the Government revenue it is necessary so to do, he may, by order in writing, attach provisionally, any property, including bank account, belonging to the taxable person or any person specified in sub-section (1A) of section 122, in such manner as may be prescribed.

(2) Every such provisional attachment shall cease to have effect after the expiry of a period of one year from the date of the order made under sub-section (1).”

“159. Provisional attachment of property (1) Where the Commissioner decides to attach any property, including bank account in accordance with the provisions of section 83, he shall pass an order in FORM GST DRC-22 to that effect mentioning therein, the details of property which is attached.

(2) The Commissioner shall send a copy of the order of attachment in FORM GST DRC-