Order Date – 21 December 2023

Parties: M/s Arramva Corporation & Ors. Vs The Additional Director General & Ors.

Facts –

• The Petitioner, M/s Arramva Corporation, is a partnership firm and their Bank account was provisionally attached by the department.
• The Petitioner submits that order of provisional attachment was taken without there being any proceeding pending under Chapters- XII, XIV and XV of the Act. The impugned provisional order of attachment in Form GST DRC 22 is non est in law as it revealed from the impugned attachment order which is not in proper format as per Rule 159(1) of CGST Rules.

Issue –

• Whether the provisional attachment is in accordance with law?

Order –

• The Single Bench of Hon’ble High Court observed that  on reading conjointly Section 1(2), Section 6(1), Section 83, Section 122(1) and Section 122 (1A), Clause (i), (ii), (vii) and (ix) thereunder and judgments referred, relevant circulars and notification and taking into consideration materials found against the petitioners during investigation, CGST Guwahati authority’s action of attaching the bank account of the petitioner provisionally and the impugned order to this effect is very much legal, valid and within jurisdiction and is not liable to be interfered by the Court.
• Further with regard to maintainability of the writ petition before this Court on the ground of lack of territorial jurisdiction is concerned, it was noticed that part of cause of action arose within the territorial jurisdiction of this Court since petitioner’s bank account in Kolkata was attached though may it be by an authority in Guwahati and in view of the fact that petitioner is a registered person in Kolkata and as such writ petition before this Court against the impugned order passed by the authority at Guwahati is maintainable.
• Accordingly the Writ Petition is dismissed.