<?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>2025 (2) TMI 354 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=765808</link>
    <description>HC directed that one bank account be fully unfrozen and another be unfrozen only up to Rs. 70 lakhs; the debit freeze remains effective for amounts exceeding Rs. 70 lakhs. The challenge concerning recovery of alleged tax liability and related provisional attachments was resolved by these account-specific orders, and the application was disposed of.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 31 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 05 Nov 2025 15:09:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=796437" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (2) TMI 354 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=765808</link>
      <description>HC directed that one bank account be fully unfrozen and another be unfrozen only up to Rs. 70 lakhs; the debit freeze remains effective for amounts exceeding Rs. 70 lakhs. The challenge concerning recovery of alleged tax liability and related provisional attachments was resolved by these account-specific orders, and the application was disposed of.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 31 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=765808</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>