Provisional attachment under GST requires tangible material and recorded reasons; writ challenge was maintainable where objections remained undecided.

Provisional attachment of bank accounts under section 83 of the Tamil Nadu GST Act requires the Commissioner to form an opinion on tangible material that the measure is necessary to protect revenue, and strict compliance with the statutory safeguards is mandatory. Here, the attachment order did not disclose the material or reasons supporting that opinion, so the attachment was invalid and quashed. The writ petitions were also maintainable because the petitioners had already filed a detailed objection under rule 159(5), which had not been decided; the existence of that remedy therefore did not bar writ relief. The consequential bank communications were also set aside, without preventing the revenue from proceeding afresh in accordance with law.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the provisional attachment of the petitioners' bank accounts under section 83 of the Tamil Nadu Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 was valid in the absence of recorded reasons and tangible material showing necessity to protect revenue; (ii) Whether the writ petitions were not maintainable for failure to exhaust the remedy under rule 159(5) of the Tamil Nadu Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2019.

Issue (i): Whether the provisional attachment of the petitioners' bank accounts under section 83 of the Tamil Nadu Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 was valid in the absence of recorded reasons and tangible material showing necessity to protect revenue.

Analysis: The power of provisional attachment is exceptional and can be exercised only when the Commissioner forms an opinion, on tangible material, that such attachment is necessary for protecting the interest of government revenue. The impugned order merely stated that the accounts were provisionally attached to protect revenue, but did not disclose the basis for formation of opinion or the material relied upon. Applying the governing principles on strict compliance with the statutory preconditions, the attachment order did not satisfy the mandatory requirements.

Conclusion: The provisional attachment was invalid and liable to be set aside.

Issue (ii): Whether the writ petitions were not maintainable for failure to exhaust the remedy under rule 159(5) of the Tamil Nadu Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2019.

Analysis: The available objection procedure under rule 159(5) was invoked by the petitioners by filing a detailed representation against the attachment, and the same had not been considered. In these circumstances, it could not be said that the petitioners had bypassed the statutory remedy so as to bar the writ petitions. The objection on maintainability was therefore rejected.

Conclusion: The writ petitions were maintainable.

Final Conclusion: The provisional attachment and the consequential bank communications were quashed, while leaving the revenue free to proceed afresh in accordance with law if supported by reasons and tangible material.

Ratio Decidendi: A provisional attachment under section 83 can stand only if the Commissioner's opinion is formed on tangible material and the statutory safeguards are strictly complied with; a writ petition is not barred where the attachment challenge has already been raised under rule 159(5) and remains unadjudicated.

---