<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2015 (6) TMI 501 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=260576</link>
    <description>The High Court allowed the writ petition filed by a private firm and its proprietor, quashing the order of the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence directing the freeze of the firm&#039;s bank account under the Customs Act, 1962. The Court held that the Directorate&#039;s action was without jurisdiction as Section 110 of the Act does not authorize holding withdrawals from bank accounts. The Court referenced precedents from other High Courts to support its decision, concluding that the Senior Intelligence Officer lacked the power to issue such a freeze direction. The freeze order was set aside, and the petitioners were permitted to operate the bank account.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 07 May 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 30 Sep 2015 11:42:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=387737" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (6) TMI 501 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=260576</link>
      <description>The High Court allowed the writ petition filed by a private firm and its proprietor, quashing the order of the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence directing the freeze of the firm&#039;s bank account under the Customs Act, 1962. The Court held that the Directorate&#039;s action was without jurisdiction as Section 110 of the Act does not authorize holding withdrawals from bank accounts. The Court referenced precedents from other High Courts to support its decision, concluding that the Senior Intelligence Officer lacked the power to issue such a freeze direction. The freeze order was set aside, and the petitioners were permitted to operate the bank account.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 07 May 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=260576</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>