<?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>2020 (3) TMI 892 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=393748</link>
    <description>The Court set aside the provisional attachment orders under Section 83 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, on the condition that fresh orders be passed by a specified date, considering the Petitioners&#039; submissions. The Court emphasized the need for proper reasoning in such orders and directed the officer to explain the decision-making process. The Petitioners provided details of essential business payments from the frozen accounts, and the Court continued the interim order de-freezing one Petitioner&#039;s OD account. The parties were instructed to comply with specified terms until new orders were issued, with the Court reserving its opinion on the contentions raised.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 18 Mar 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 17 Mar 2025 14:20:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=607674" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (3) TMI 892 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=393748</link>
      <description>The Court set aside the provisional attachment orders under Section 83 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, on the condition that fresh orders be passed by a specified date, considering the Petitioners&#039; submissions. The Court emphasized the need for proper reasoning in such orders and directed the officer to explain the decision-making process. The Petitioners provided details of essential business payments from the frozen accounts, and the Court continued the interim order de-freezing one Petitioner&#039;s OD account. The parties were instructed to comply with specified terms until new orders were issued, with the Court reserving its opinion on the contentions raised.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 18 Mar 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=393748</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>