Retention of seized property survives where recorded reasons support proceeds of crime, while stayed investigation periods are excluded from limitatio...
Specified income of Baddi Barotiwala Nalagarh Development Authority receives conditional tax exemption, retrospectively covering its designated assess...
Specified development authority income receives retrospective tax exemption, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return-...
Unified Brand India framework introduces voluntary Trust Mark certification and funding support for export branding, packaging and global promotional ...
Origin Declaration authentication governs preferential tariff claims under India-UK CETA, requiring a validated reference number before import clearan...
Separate assessment orders for different years remain valid when distinct notices and hearing opportunities prevent prejudice from combined proceeding...
Provisional orders of attachment issued u/s 83 can be challenged by filing objection u/r 159(5). Petitioner did not file objection. Respondents issued fresh provisional attachment orders as notices u/s 74 could not be served on petitioner, who prima facie avoided service. Provisional attachment orders, though drastic, are permissible to protect revenue interest. Petitioner did not apply for release of property by filing objection u/r 159(5) even after fresh attachment orders. Inquiry u/s 74 is ongoing. At this stage, there appears material for provisional attachment orders. Petitioner did not approach respondents u/r 159(5) and did not explain non-approach. Petitioner not entitled to writ remedy. Petition dismissed.
Provisional orders of attachment issued u/s 83 can be challenged by filing objection u/r 159(5). Petitioner did not file objection. Respondents issued fresh provisional attachment orders as notices u/s 74 could not be served on petitioner, who prima facie avoided service. Provisional attachment orders, though drastic, are permissible to protect revenue interest. Petitioner did not apply for release of property by filing objection u/r 159(5) even after fresh attachment orders. Inquiry u/s 74 is ongoing. At this stage, there appears material for provisional attachment orders. Petitioner did not approach respondents u/r 159(5) and did not explain non-approach. Petitioner not entitled to writ remedy. Petition dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.