Reopening Assessments invalid where satisfaction and jurisdictional approval are absent for third party seized material, leading to quashing of assess...
Benami property exclusion from the insolvency estate: Benami Act proceedings preclude IBC tribunals from reopening attachments or treating such assets...
Exclusion of limitation period: pandemic suspension plus debtor acknowledgement can extend limitation, requiring fresh factfinding on guarantee invoca...
The dominant issue was whether an investigating agency has statutory authority under s. 106 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 to attach or debit-freeze a bank account. Relying on settled law under the corresponding seizure power in s. 102 CrPC, as explained in precedent, the court held that police may seize only property that is stolen or found in circumstances creating suspicion of commission of an offence; conversely, property not meeting this threshold cannot be seized. Since s. 106 BNSS does not confer an attachment/debit-freezing power over bank accounts, the impugned debit-freeze orders were quashed and set aside. - HC
The dominant issue was whether an investigating agency has statutory authority under s. 106 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 to attach or debit-freeze a bank account. Relying on settled law under the corresponding seizure power in s. 102 CrPC, as explained in precedent, the court held that police may seize only property that is stolen or found in circumstances creating suspicion of commission of an offence; conversely, property not meeting this threshold cannot be seized. Since s. 106 BNSS does not confer an attachment/debit-freezing power over bank accounts, the impugned debit-freeze orders were quashed and set aside. - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
