https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=378402 Section 174's repeal-and-saving framework was held not to be inconsistent with the constitutional transitional provision in Section 19 of the Constitution (One Hundred and First Amendment) Act, 2016. The Court found that the saving language preserves existing rights, liabilities, and proceedings relating to repealed or amended tax laws, and therefore rejects the vires challenge. It also clarified that Section 174(e) allows both continuation of already instituted proceedings and institution of proceedings after commencement, so there is no statutory bar on post-commencement investigations or proceedings. The writ petition was dismissed as withdrawn, with liberty to challenge territorial jurisdiction. en-us Thu, 14 Mar 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 07 Mar 2025 16:37:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=378402 Section 174's repeal-and-saving framework was held not to be inconsistent with the constitutional transitional provision in Section 19 of the Constitution (One Hundred and First Amendment) Act, 2016. The Court found that the saving language preserves existing rights, liabilities, and proceedings relating to repealed or amended tax laws, and therefore rejects the vires challenge. It also clarified that Section 174(e) allows both continuation of already instituted proceedings and institution of proceedings after commencement, so there is no statutory bar on post-commencement investigations or proceedings. The writ petition was dismissed as withdrawn, with liberty to challenge territorial jurisdiction. Case-Laws GST Thu, 14 Mar 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=378402