Classification of imported salvaged shaft pieces as ship parts confirmed, reassessment time-barred and appeal allowed restoring original classificatio...
Scope of intermediary status for data hosting services: tribunal finds provider not intermediary, services exported and not taxable, limited remand on...
CENVAT credit availability after omission of Rule 12B in textiles confirmed; late addendum to SCN introducing new grounds held time-barred and invalid...
Export of Wheat Flour and related products subject to online allocation, eligibility criteria, non-transferable six-month authorisations and reporting...
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.