Strict statutory conditions govern attachment of excisable goods; without them, the attachment power is invalid.

Rule 230(2) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 authorises attachment of excisable goods only when its statutory preconditions are strictly met: there must be a transfer or disposal of business or a change in ownership, another person must succeed to that business, and the duty on the goods must have been assessed and remain unpaid, or be assessed after the transfer. Where an attachment order does not record those conditions, including succession in business and unpaid assessed duty, the power cannot be validly exercised. On that basis, an attachment made without those jurisdictional facts is illegal and the goods are liable to be released.

---

---

Issues: Whether the attachment of the petitioner's goods could be sustained under Rule 230(2) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 in the absence of the statutory conditions for invoking that power.

Analysis: Rule 230(2) permits attachment of excisable goods in the custody or possession of the successor only where the transferor has transferred or otherwise disposed of the business or effected a change in ownership, another person succeeds to that business, and the duty due on the goods had been assessed before the transfer but remained unpaid, or was assessed thereafter. The attachment order did not refer to any transfer of business, did not allege that the petitioner was a successor in business, and did not record that the goods had been assessed to duty and remained unpaid. The statutory conditions for exercise of the power were therefore absent.

Conclusion: The attachment order was without jurisdiction and illegal, and the petitioner was entitled to release of the goods.

Ratio Decidendi: A power of attachment under Rule 230(2) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 can be exercised only upon strict satisfaction of the specified statutory conditions, and any attachment made without those conditions is without jurisdiction.

---