Enforcement Attachment / Account Freeze is the state taking or freezing money in your bank account before or after judgment to secure revenue or to stop you dissipating assets.

There are 3 different tools that get confused:

All three have been held to be drastic, attracting civil consequences - Bombay High Court 2024.

1. The Origin - Mareva Injunction - The Global Standard

Mareva Compania Naviera S.A. v International Bulkcarriers S.A. 1 All ER 213 - The Mareva[1980]

Facts: Mareva chartered ship to defendants, who had money in London bank. Fear they will remove money out of jurisdiction.

Held: Court of Appeal granted injunction restraining defendants from removing or disposing of money standing to credit in London bank account. Lord Denning created freezing order.

Principles from Nippon Yusen Kaisha v Karageorgis + Mareva:[1975]

• Mareva is ad-personam - restrains person, not account itself
• Needs: good arguable case, real risk of dissipation, just and convenient
• Ex parte possible, but full and frank disclosure mandatory

Now called Freezing Order under CPR 25.1(f). Can be Worldwide Freezing Order (WFO) - Henderson v Henderson - Hong Kong High Court granted worldwide freeze resulting in freeze of assets, income withholding order and retirement account.

Cantak Corporation v Haderer, 2026 ABKB 93 - Alberta Court of King's Bench granted both statutory attachment order under Sec 17 Civil Enforcement Act and Mareva injunction against former senior employee and partner for civil bribery and breach of fiduciary duty. Strong prima facie case enough.

2. India - Provisional Attachment - The Most Litigated

Legal Test laid down by Supreme Court in Radha Krishan Industries v State of Himachal Pradesh 4 TMI 837 - SC[2021]

This is the bible for all GST/CGST Sec 83 cases. SC held:

1. Power under Sec 83 is drastic - not routine
2. Commissioner must form opinion based on tangible material that attachment necessary to protect revenue
3. Must be during pendency of proceedings under Sec 62,63,64,67,73,74
4. Attachment ceases after 1 year
5. Must record reasons in writing, not just apprehension

Every High Court now tests attachment against Radha Krishan.

Goisu Realty Pvt Ltd v State of Maharashtra 2025 BHC-OS:1518
Bombay High Court examined whether provisional attachment complied with Radha Krishan. Authorities provisionally attached bank account bringing business operations to halt. Court quashed - no tangible material, no live proceedings, no recording of necessity.

FCS Manufacturing (India) Pvt Ltd v DDIT 145 taxmann.com 393 Gujarat
Bank accounts attached under Income Tax. Court held interest of revenue can be protected by Bank Guarantee/Fixed Deposit. Provisional attachment of both bank accounts unnecessary if FD sufficient. Directed release on furnishing BG.[2022]

Kunj Power Project Pvt Ltd v UOI
Attachment of 2 bank accounts in ICICI and Central Bank on 20 Oct 2015 without notice. Court held attachment can only be done after giving proper notice and reasonable opportunity of being heard under Service Tax Provisional Attachment Rules 2008.

Bombay HC - Illegal attachment violates Article 300A
Continued attachment without complying statutory requirements violates right to property under Article 300A. In 2026 case, State Tax attached accounts on 23.01.2026. Division bench of Justices G.S. Kulkarni and Aarti Sathe quashed and imposed Rs 25k costs on officer. Held provisional attachment is drastic.

Best Buildwell Pvt Ltd v R.D. Sales 2025 DHC 4898 - Delhi High Court - GST freeze vs NI Act
Petitioner’s bank account provisionally attached by GST under Sec 83 CGST. Cheque bounced - complaint under Sec 138 NI Act. Question: Is provisionally attached account "maintained" for 138?

Justice Ravinder Dudeja held: Provisionally attached account is not "maintained" by drawer - he cannot operate. So no Sec 138 liability if attachment is the reason for dishonour. Frozen-account defence.

3. India - Garnishee / Recovery Attachment - Sec 226(3) Income Tax

After assessment final, AO can send notice to bank: "You hold money for assessee, pay to me."

Unique Engineering Enterprises Pvt Ltd v ACIT - Telangana HC 2025
Garnishee notice dated 08.01.2025 attaching bank accounts despite pendency of appeal and stay application. HC held issuance of garnishee notice attaching bank account despite pendency of appeal not sustainable - set aside. Must await stay decision.

Boang Technology Pvt Ltd v ACIT - Delhi HC - Sep 2025
Assessing Officer rejected stay application on 23.09.2025, then on 24.09.2025 issued Sec 226(3) to HDFC Bank freezing 13 accounts. Delhi HC recorded Revenue statement and directed lifting on 20% deposit, preserving right to seek stay from CIT. Balance of convenience.

Connectwell Industries Pvt Ltd v UOI - Supreme Court & Kaish Impex Pvt Ltd v UOI - Bombay HC
Both held: Sec 83 CGST power is drastic, considering consequences that ensue from provisional attachment of bank accounts, power not to be routinely exercised. Coercive recovery via garnishee notices during investigation without determination of liability = arbitrary.

4. When Freeze is Illegal - Remedies

You have 4 remedies in India:

Writ under Art 226 - Most effective. Quash attachment if violates Radha Krishan. Get stay in 24-48h. High Court can release accounts on FD/BG.

Objection under Rule 2 of Attachment Rules - Before Commissioner

Sec 138 NI Act defence - If cheque bounced due to provisional attachment, account not "maintained" - Best Buildwell 2025.

Damages - Article 300A - Illegal attachment = violation of right to property. Bombay HC imposed costs on officer personally.

Practical checklist if your account frozen today:

• Ask for copy of attachment order - must have Sec 83 order number, reasons, proceedings reference
• Check if proceedings under Sec 73/74 pending - if not, Radha Krishan violation
• Check 1-year expiry - Sec 83(2) CGST - attachment automatically ceases after 1 year
• Offer alternative security - FD, BG - courts prefer this over freezing operating account - FCS Manufacturing ratio
• File writ - do not wait for adjudication