<?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 (9) TMI 613 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=332352</link>
    <description>Section 45 of the Gujarat Value Added Tax Act, 2003 permits provisional attachment during pending assessment or reassessment to protect revenue. The Court found prima facie material indicating substantial tax dues and noted that the petitioner had already obtained large bank credit facilities against mortgaged properties. It also recorded that the earlier request to lift attachment had been obtained through material non-disclosure, as the heavy borrowings and recovery proceedings were not revealed. In these circumstances, the Court saw no reason to interfere with the Commissioner&#039;s exercise of power and upheld the provisional attachment of the bank accounts.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 07 Sep 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 29 Dec 2016 18:26:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=441196" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (9) TMI 613 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=332352</link>
      <description>Section 45 of the Gujarat Value Added Tax Act, 2003 permits provisional attachment during pending assessment or reassessment to protect revenue. The Court found prima facie material indicating substantial tax dues and noted that the petitioner had already obtained large bank credit facilities against mortgaged properties. It also recorded that the earlier request to lift attachment had been obtained through material non-disclosure, as the heavy borrowings and recovery proceedings were not revealed. In these circumstances, the Court saw no reason to interfere with the Commissioner&#039;s exercise of power and upheld the provisional attachment of the bank accounts.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>VAT and Sales Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 07 Sep 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=332352</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>