https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=98601 The HC held that provisional attachment of bank accounts under Section 110(5) lapsed by operation of law where the original orders limited attachment to six months and no recorded extension was made before expiry. Continuation beyond that period required a fresh, reasoned extension by the competent authority and notice to the affected person; a prior judicial order permitting limited operation of the accounts could not override the statutory time-limit or authorise automatic continuation. The attachment orders were therefore invalid and ineffective after expiry, and the petitioners were entitled to operate the bank accounts. en-us Thu, 09 Apr 2026 08:09:11 +0530 Thu, 09 Apr 2026 08:09:14 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=98601 The HC held that provisional attachment of bank accounts under Section 110(5) lapsed by operation of law where the original orders limited attachment to six months and no recorded extension was made before expiry. Continuation beyond that period required a fresh, reasoned extension by the competent authority and notice to the affected person; a prior judicial order permitting limited operation of the accounts could not override the statutory time-limit or authorise automatic continuation. The attachment orders were therefore invalid and ineffective after expiry, and the petitioners were entitled to operate the bank accounts. Highlights Customs Thu, 09 Apr 2026 08:09:11 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=98601