<?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 (11) TMI 113 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=780645</link>
    <description>HC held that a provisional attachment under Section 83 had expired after one year and a fresh attachment issued the next day was illegal and without jurisdiction. The second provisional attachment was quashed as arbitrary and contrary to the law. The petitioner was permitted to operate the provisionally attached current account. The writ petition was disposed of accordingly.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 15 Oct 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 03 Nov 2025 08:13:54 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=861784" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (11) TMI 113 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=780645</link>
      <description>HC held that a provisional attachment under Section 83 had expired after one year and a fresh attachment issued the next day was illegal and without jurisdiction. The second provisional attachment was quashed as arbitrary and contrary to the law. The petitioner was permitted to operate the provisionally attached current account. The writ petition was disposed of accordingly.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 15 Oct 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=780645</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>