https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=467892 Attachment of a building and superstructure on long-term leased land was upheld because the lease deed permitted construction of the industrial unit, ownership of the land remained with the State during the lease period, and no notice terminating or rescinding the lease had been issued. Acceptance of premium and annual rent also supported the view that there was no enforceable grievance against the attachment. The challenge was treated as lacking independent merit, particularly because release of the structure would have benefited the accused rather than protected any legal right of the appellant. The attachment order was therefore sustained and the appeal dismissed. en-us Thu, 08 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 08 Apr 2026 20:27:04 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=467892 Attachment of a building and superstructure on long-term leased land was upheld because the lease deed permitted construction of the industrial unit, ownership of the land remained with the State during the lease period, and no notice terminating or rescinding the lease had been issued. Acceptance of premium and annual rent also supported the view that there was no enforceable grievance against the attachment. The challenge was treated as lacking independent merit, particularly because release of the structure would have benefited the accused rather than protected any legal right of the appellant. The attachment order was therefore sustained and the appeal dismissed. Case-Laws Money Laundering Thu, 08 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=467892