<?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>2017 (9) TMI 589 - SC Order</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=347832</link>
    <description>A CBDT circular issued under Section 119 of the Income-tax Act could not amend Rule 68B of the Second Schedule, because that Rule formed part of the statutory scheme and had legislative force. The Board&#039;s administrative power under Section 119 could not override or modify provisions with statutory effect, and any such attempt was beyond jurisdiction and ultra vires. On that basis, the circular was treated as invalid and the challenge to the High Court&#039;s view failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 13 Jul 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 26 Sep 2017 11:03:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=488962" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (9) TMI 589 - SC Order</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=347832</link>
      <description>A CBDT circular issued under Section 119 of the Income-tax Act could not amend Rule 68B of the Second Schedule, because that Rule formed part of the statutory scheme and had legislative force. The Board&#039;s administrative power under Section 119 could not override or modify provisions with statutory effect, and any such attempt was beyond jurisdiction and ultra vires. On that basis, the circular was treated as invalid and the challenge to the High Court&#039;s view failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 13 Jul 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=347832</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>