Independent show-cause notices remain separate proceedings, while customs adjudication challenges should ordinarily follow the statutory appellate rem...
Institutional incapacity in customs settlement proceedings excludes non-functional quorum periods from statutory disposal timelines, preventing automa...
Interactive touchscreen panels with integrated computing functions fall under automatic data-processing machines rather than display monitors for cust...
Ex parte injunction service requirements were substantially met, while civil recovery and SFIO investigation into provident fund defalcation continued...
Enforcement of resolution-plan directions continues without a Supreme Court stay, preventing suspension of redistribution and escrowed-fund distributi...
Third-party ownership claims over attached property require Special Court adjudication where purchasers lack registered sale deeds and bona fides rema...
Pure-agent reimbursements in clearing and forwarding services are excluded from taxable value when qualifying third-party payments are properly record...
A second provisional attachment issued after the earlier order had expired was unsustainable where it rested on the same facts and no change in circumstances was shown. The Court held that Section 83(2) does not permit a fresh attachment on substantially identical grounds after the statutory one-year period, as this would defeat the built-in safeguard against misuse. It also held that provisional attachment is only a pre-emptive protective measure and cannot be used as a post-assessment recovery device once assessment has culminated in a final order. The petition was allowed and the attachment was quashed.
A second provisional attachment issued after the earlier order had expired was unsustainable where it rested on the same facts and no change in circumstances was shown. The Court held that Section 83(2) does not permit a fresh attachment on substantially identical grounds after the statutory one-year period, as this would defeat the built-in safeguard against misuse. It also held that provisional attachment is only a pre-emptive protective measure and cannot be used as a post-assessment recovery device once assessment has culminated in a final order. The petition was allowed and the attachment was quashed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4782
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
