<?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>2019 (8) TMI 1954 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=468997</link>
    <description>At the interim stage, the Delhi High Court held that freezing of bank accounts would not block payment of statutory dues, including taxes and GST, or essential utility payments. It also permitted each of petitioner nos. 2 to 4 to withdraw up to Rs. 1,00,000 per month from their respective accounts for living expenses. The petition remained pending for further hearing, with the interim arrangement preserving compliance with statutory obligations and basic personal access to funds.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 01 Aug 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 28 May 2026 16:50:32 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=904267" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (8) TMI 1954 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=468997</link>
      <description>At the interim stage, the Delhi High Court held that freezing of bank accounts would not block payment of statutory dues, including taxes and GST, or essential utility payments. It also permitted each of petitioner nos. 2 to 4 to withdraw up to Rs. 1,00,000 per month from their respective accounts for living expenses. The petition remained pending for further hearing, with the interim arrangement preserving compliance with statutory obligations and basic personal access to funds.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Money Laundering</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 01 Aug 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=468997</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>