Inherited property sale proceeds require capital-gains treatment where ownership is supported by evidence, not suspicion or unverified signature doubt...
Cross-examination of retracted statements is essential where foundational evidence supports a benami allegation and documented funding explanations re...
Capital-goods exemption covers plant-modernisation accessories, while the import restriction applies only to earlier capital-goods components and spar...
Constitutional judicial review permits challenges to ECIRs and connected money-laundering proceedings where coercive action affects fundamental intere...
The HC held that the provisional attachment of two of the petitioner's bank accounts under Section 83(1) of the CGST Act had exceeded the statutory one-year limit prescribed in Section 83(2), read with Rule 159 of the CGST Rules. As the attachments, effected via Form GST DRC-22 dated 11.11.2024, had "outlived" the permissible duration, they could not legally subsist thereafter. Noting that counsel for the revenue could not confirm lifting of the attachments post-expiry, the HC declared that such provisional attachment cannot continue beyond one year and accordingly set aside the attachments of the two accounts. The writ petition was allowed in part.
The HC held that the provisional attachment of two of the petitioner's bank accounts under Section 83(1) of the CGST Act had exceeded the statutory one-year limit prescribed in Section 83(2), read with Rule 159 of the CGST Rules. As the attachments, effected via Form GST DRC-22 dated 11.11.2024, had "outlived" the permissible duration, they could not legally subsist thereafter. Noting that counsel for the revenue could not confirm lifting of the attachments post-expiry, the HC declared that such provisional attachment cannot continue beyond one year and accordingly set aside the attachments of the two accounts. The writ petition was allowed in part.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4788
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
