Provisional attachment under GST upheld where credible material showed suspected bogus billing and risk to revenue recovery.

Provisional attachment of bank accounts under section 83 of the Gujarat GST Act is a drastic revenue-protection measure, but it is valid where credible material supports a reasonable apprehension of default in recovery and the Commissioner has formed the required opinion. The Court accepted material indicating large-scale e-way bill issuance, suspected bogus billing, and transactions without physical movement of goods, and found sufficient basis for the attachment. The challenge on jurisdictional and legality grounds therefore failed, and the attachment order was upheld.

---

---

Issues: Whether the provisional attachment of the petitioners' bank accounts under section 83 of the Gujarat Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 was jurisdiction or otherwise unlawful.

Analysis: The petitioners questioned the invocation of section 83 on the ground that no pending proceedings justified attachment and that the Commissioner had not properly formed an opinion. The material placed before the Court, however, indicated large-scale issuance of e-way bills, suspected bogus billing, and transactions without physical movement of goods. Applying the governing principles on provisional attachment, the Court held that the power under section 83 is drastic but may be exercised when there is credible material, a reasonable apprehension of default in ultimate recovery, and a need to protect the revenue. On the facts, the Court found sufficient material to support the formation of opinion and concluded that the attachment was not shown to be without jurisdiction.

Conclusion: The challenge to the provisional attachment failed and the attachment order was upheld.

---