https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=751479 Where SAFEMA forfeiture and attachment proceedings rest entirely on a detention order, the quashing of that detention order, once final, removes the legal foundation for the action. The Bombay HC held that the consequential attachment could not survive after the detention order had been set aside and the challenge to that quashing had failed before the apex court. The forfeiture proceedings were therefore unsustainable, and the attached amounts were ordered to be released and restored to the petitioners with accrued interest as directed. en-us Fri, 05 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 17 Apr 2024 10:32:33 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=751479 Where SAFEMA forfeiture and attachment proceedings rest entirely on a detention order, the quashing of that detention order, once final, removes the legal foundation for the action. The Bombay HC held that the consequential attachment could not survive after the detention order had been set aside and the challenge to that quashing had failed before the apex court. The forfeiture proceedings were therefore unsustainable, and the attached amounts were ordered to be released and restored to the petitioners with accrued interest as directed. Case-Laws FEMA Fri, 05 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=751479