<?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>2016 (3) TMI 386 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=325202</link>
    <description>Provisional attachment of bank accounts made during reassessment does not ordinarily survive once the reassessment proceedings culminate, because the basis for that interim restraint ceases; the attachment was to be withdrawn. Where an assessee has filed a timely appeal with a stay application, revenue authorities should ordinarily refrain from coercive recovery until the stay request is decided, unless exceptional circumstances such as assessee default or delay attributable to the assessee exist. Recovery by debiting the bank account during pendency of the stay application was treated as inconsistent with that approach, and coercive recovery was restrained pending decision on the stay request.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 22 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 14 Mar 2016 12:10:22 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=420009" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (3) TMI 386 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=325202</link>
      <description>Provisional attachment of bank accounts made during reassessment does not ordinarily survive once the reassessment proceedings culminate, because the basis for that interim restraint ceases; the attachment was to be withdrawn. Where an assessee has filed a timely appeal with a stay application, revenue authorities should ordinarily refrain from coercive recovery until the stay request is decided, unless exceptional circumstances such as assessee default or delay attributable to the assessee exist. Recovery by debiting the bank account during pendency of the stay application was treated as inconsistent with that approach, and coercive recovery was restrained pending decision on the stay request.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 22 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=325202</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>