Retrospective application of beneficial circulars upheld, binding officers and granting post adjudication relief where adjudication occurred after cir...
Admissibility of Investigation Statements requires witness examination before the adjudicating authority; otherwise statements cannot sustain a penalt...
Transaction value and connected person treatment in excise valuation: proprietary concerns not inter connected undertakings, relief on valuation and c...
Appointment of Registrars as adjudicating officers under Companies Act reallocates territorial jurisdiction and sets appeal route to Regional Director...
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 
TaxTMI 
of 4821 
Join Channel 
