TaxTMI Login
AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) ✕
Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Just a moment...
AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) ✕ Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the detention order could be quashed at the pre-execution stage on the ground that delay in execution had snapped the live link between the prejudicial activities and the purpose of detention.
Analysis: The petition was confined to the issue of delay and continued utility of the detention order, the broader pre-execution challenge having already been attempted in earlier proceedings. The governing principle is that a pre-execution challenge to a preventive detention order is available only in limited circumstances, and delay by itself does not justify interference if the non-execution is attributable to the proposed detenu. The record showed that the petitioner and his family had unsuccessfully challenged the order and that, after those proceedings, an interim restraint operated for a substantial period. Once that restraint ended, the authorities initiated proceedings under section 7 of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974. In these circumstances, the delay could not be treated as unexplained or as a basis to hold that the live and proximate link had snapped.
Conclusion: The detention order was not liable to be quashed on the ground of delay, and the challenge failed.
TaxTMI 
