Retrospective cancellation of charitable registration under section 12AB(4) was unsustainable; related-party benefit allegations did not prove nongenu...
Merger control notice and disclosure rules: Supreme Court limits penalties, rejects reopening of approved combination, and sets aside adverse findings...
HC held that Sections 269-UN and 293 of Income Tax Act, 1961 do not bar civil court jurisdiction in the present suit. The court found no impediment to plaintiffs seeking declaration of property re-vestment, as the suit does not challenge or modify any income tax order. The single judge's earlier order was set aside, with the suit restored for expedited hearing. The court ruled against revenue authorities, determining that the statutory provisions do not prevent judicial review of the specific legal claim. No costs were awarded, and the original proceedings shall continue until final disposal.
HC held that Sections 269-UN and 293 of Income Tax Act, 1961 do not bar civil court jurisdiction in the present suit. The court found no impediment to plaintiffs seeking declaration of property re-vestment, as the suit does not challenge or modify any income tax order. The single judge's earlier order was set aside, with the suit restored for expedited hearing. The court ruled against revenue authorities, determining that the statutory provisions do not prevent judicial review of the specific legal claim. No costs were awarded, and the original proceedings shall continue until final disposal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.